From fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk Sun Jan 1 00:05:53 2006 From: fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk (Andy Burns) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:05:53 +0000 Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: <43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> Linus Walleij wrote: > AFAIK there is no clear rationale at all unless it someday comes out > of the Red Hat legal dept. Strange beasts lawyers, in layman's terms Wine, Mono and gcj *SET OUT* to duplicate Win32, .Net and Java respectively, yet two get ruled for, and one against ... From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 1 00:13:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:13:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010013.k010DS1T008286@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2005-12-31 19:13 EST ------- Formal review: * Package naming OK. * The spec file name matches the base package %{name}. * Meets packaging guidelines. * Package has a open source compliant license (LGPL). * The License: field matches the actual license. * License included with %doc tag. * Spec file is written in American English. * Spec file is readable (and very straight forward). * Sources match upstream (same md5sum). * Builds successfully on FC4 i386 and i386smp. * Problems with 64bit builds solved by using 32bit RPM versions, if ExcludeArch: tags are needed for this they will be imminent during package build. * Build requirements seem fine now. * Mulilingual stuff is handled internally by Wine. (No gettext.) * ldconfig is properly called. * Package does not support relocations. * Wine owns the directories it creates (when %{_datadir}/fonts/wine/ is fixed) * No duplicate files. * Correct %clean section. * Spec file uses apropriate macros. * Package contains only permissible content. * Separate -docs package created, even has its own spec file. * Proper -devel package exists. * Wine does not use pkgconfig so no .pc files. * There are a lot of .so (no numbers) files in %_libdir/wine but this is acceptable in this case because these are actually win32 DLL files and not usable by the dynamic link library loader as such. Also these do not have any matching .1.1 etc files. * The POSIXish .so (no numbers) files are in the -devel package. * -devel package requires base package, same for all subpackages actually. * Libtool archives not included in any packages. * .desktop files included for all WINE applications as far as the reviewer can see. * .a files includes: %{_libdir}/wine/*.a is this really needed? rpmlint runs: wine-0.9.4-1 produce no messages. wine-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm: W: wine no-version-in-last-changelog E: wine statically-linked-binary /usr/bin/wine-preloader W: wine non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ld.so.conf.d/wine-32.conf W: wine service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/wine E: wine subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/wine Both errors seem to be ignorable. Warnings are confused. wine-tools-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-tools no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-tools no-documentation wine-arts-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-arts no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-arts no-documentation wine-esd-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-esd no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-esd no-documentation wine-jack-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-jack no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-jack no-documentation wine-nas-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-nas no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-nas no-documentation wine-ldap-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-ldap no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-ldap no-documentation wine-cms-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-cms no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-cms no-documentation wine-twain-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-twain no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-twain no-documentation wine-capi-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-capi no-version-in-last-changelog W: wine-capi no-documentation wine-devel-0.9.4-1.i386.rpm W: wine-devel summary-ended-with-dot Wine development environment. W: wine-devel no-version-in-last-changelog Fix the summary problem with the -devel package. Uncertain about what causes the "no-version-in-last-changelog" message. The others seem OK. Documentation is elsewhere. If these (small) things are fixed, we are very close to accepting. Also the two last remarks made for this package by me should be taken into 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 Sun Jan 1 00:39:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:39:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010039.k010dfM1009528@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2005-12-31 19:39 EST ------- The new defaults and fixed dependencies work much better here. Running update-desktop-database is still not necessary since the .desktop file doesn't activate any MIME-type assignments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 1 02:19:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:19:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175844] Review Request: wmx -- really simple and basic X window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010219.k012JVhm013948@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmx -- really simple and basic X window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175844 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2005-12-31 21:19 EST ------- - Upstream source matches - Builds clean on mock in FC4 - Runs on FC4 - Everything else looks good 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 Sun Jan 1 03:05:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:05:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174275] Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010305.k0135jTa015372@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174275 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2005-12-31 22:05 EST ------- Okay so can you spin up a -5 spec file with the now correct buildrequires. I'll do a quick build of it in mock and then i'll approve based on that. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 1 08:05:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 03:05:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176205] Review Request: GZLauncher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010805.k0185Hbh028767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GZLauncher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176205 ------- Additional Comments From nickmarko at gmail.com 2006-01-01 03:05 EST ------- I beleive you made a mistake in your comment (comment #7). A few questions: Is "no locales" bad? An error or something I have to include? When you say "code, not content", what do you mean? And is this statement good or bad? Apart from slight unclarity, I'm glad you like my 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 Sun Jan 1 08:18:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 03:18:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176205] Review Request: GZLauncher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601010818.k018IrW5029138@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GZLauncher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176205 ------- Additional Comments From nickmarko at gmail.com 2006-01-01 03:18 EST ------- Uploaded new rpm and spec file. Same links. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 1 12:34:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 07:34:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011234.k01CYxr3020163@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-01 07:34 EST ------- Thanks for you time: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-0.9.4-2.src.rpm http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-fc5.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-0.9.4-2.fc5.src.rpm Fix the things you pointed out. > Uncertain about what causes the "no-version-in-last-changelog" message. This is caused because the version is in a new line but with my long name/mail combination the line would be to long. This has been accepted before if you take a look at my other packages and the reviews for them. ExcludeArch: x86_64 is probably the right way to go for now so I added that as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 1 12:47:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 07:47:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011247.k01ClPaf020825@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-01 07:47 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.2-2): - added /etc/init.d/tracd - added /etc/sysconfig/tracd Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.2-2.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 Jan 1 12:49:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 07:49:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011249.k01Cn1dZ020927@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-01 07:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #107) > ExcludeArch: x86_64 is probably the right way to go for now so I added that as well. No, it's not exactly the right way. You should have added ppc there, too, because otherwise the buildsys will try to build it on ppc -- and I suspect it builds/works there. A "ExclusiveArch: i386" probably is the right thing to do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 1 13:06:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 08:06:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011306.k01D6tq7021436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-01 08:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #108) > (In reply to comment #107) > > ExcludeArch: x86_64 is probably the right way to go for now so I added that as > well. > > No, it's not exactly the right way. You should have added ppc there, too, > because otherwise the buildsys will try to build it on ppc -- and I suspect it > builds/works there. A > "ExclusiveArch: i386" > > probably is the right thing to do. "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}" would be better since it does in fact work properly on any IA-32 archiecture. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 1 13:25:49 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:25:49 +0100 Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: <1136121949.2669.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 01.01.2006, 00:40 +0100 schrieb Linus Walleij: > On Sat, 31 Dec 2005, Andy Burns wrote: > > > Is it largely a question of how far "behind the curve" Wine is perceived to > > be compared to how close to "snapping at the heels" Mono is seen? Well, IMHO there is a large difference between "Allow users to run their old Windows apps" (Wine) and "make easy to allow (linux) programmers to use a new technology that might in some parts be protected by patents/IP-law" (mono) If there are IP-problems around wine it can be removed easily. That's quite problematic for all the users that depend on it, but they still can switch back to windows of use qemu, vmware, xen, ... But if people start to use mono now and get used to it there might be a world in five years from now where a lot of applications and a major desktop-environment depends heavily on mono. What happens if some random company suddenly says "you have to pay us {don't know} Dollar for using our IP; See: {long list of patents here}" >[...] > The most common answer that I believe other distributions will give, is > that Microsoft is in a very bad position to run lawsuits that threaten to > harm interoperability (double so in the EU), so both Mono and Wine are > quite safe. Might be, but > However two heavyweight law pillars (antitrust vs IP-law) > colliding means the outcome is uncertain at best. Exactly. > You can never plan against patent infringement anyway, You can if you have a patent-exchange or similar agreements with the holder of those patents. > so it might be best > to simply include them and wait for the call, if it ever comes. I disagree. See above. > IP law is > not a field of philosophical absolutes, though one wish it would be. We > are presumably already shipping thousands of patented routines with the > packages in Fedora, though it is highly uncertain if any of them would > stand up in court. [...] That's not a good reason to ignore the problem completely. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 1 13:27:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 08:27:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011327.k01DR39P022427@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-01 08:26 EST ------- (In reply to comment #109) > "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}" would be better since it does in fact work properly on > any IA-32 archiecture. Theoretical: Yes. But see fedora-extras list from some days ago -- it seems that plague in some situations builds such packages for i386, i586, i686 (probably others). But we still don't know for sure if the extras buildsys really does 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 Jan 1 14:04:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 09:04:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011404.k01E4kkq024814@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-01-01 09:04 EST ------- Confirmed - built OK on FC4/x86_64. Not tested. One scary warning: gcc -O2 -g -pipe -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -m64 -mtune=nocona -Wall -I.. -fPIC -o neo_hash.o -c neo_hash.c neo_hash.c: In function 'ne_hash_int_hash': neo_hash.c:292: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From triad at df.lth.se Sun Jan 1 14:55:16 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:55:16 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: <43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> <43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Andy Burns wrote: > Linus Walleij wrote: > >> AFAIK there is no clear rationale at all unless it someday comes out of >> the Red Hat legal dept. > > Strange beasts lawyers, in layman's terms Wine, Mono and gcj *SET OUT* > to duplicate Win32, .Net and Java respectively, yet two get ruled for, > and one against ... Don't blame me man, I didn't do it. Is Java encumbered by patents, really? Isn't it just the copyrighted reference implementation and testsuite that is the crux? Linus From triad at df.lth.se Sun Jan 1 14:58:05 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:58:05 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: <1136121949.2669.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> <1136121949.2669.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> You can never plan against patent infringement anyway, > > You can if you have a patent-exchange or similar agreements with the > holder of those patents. Not exactly Red Hats piece of cake if I get it right. IBM would certainly do something like that, Novell too. But this being Fedora and all... Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 1 15:34:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 10:34:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011534.k01FYCJ2028002@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-01 10:33 EST ------- (In reply to comment #110) > (In reply to comment #109) > > "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}" would be better since it does in fact work properly on > > any IA-32 archiecture. > > Theoretical: Yes. Practically also. I just tried (Job 2430). Go ahead with "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk Sun Jan 1 15:49:02 2006 From: fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk (Andy Burns) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:49:02 +0000 Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk><43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: <43B7F9EE.2060501@adslpipe.co.uk> Linus Walleij wrote: > Don't blame me man, I didn't do it. Don't worry! > Is Java encumbered by patents, really? Isn't it just the copyrighted > reference implementation and testsuite that is the crux? You're right, I've never heard of Sun making any threats about 3rd party implementation, just binary distribution and limitations on source access. Probably discussion of a specific *implementation* of java wasn't appropriate to the comparison between win32/wine and .net/mono, although as I was putting it in layman's terms (I don't know for who's benefit) it seemed similar ... From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 1 17:24:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 12:24:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601011724.k01HOOcQ032618@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-01 12:23 EST ------- The architecture exclusion stuff will obviously solve itself during build. All other problems are successfully resolved. 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 triad at df.lth.se Sun Jan 1 17:42:57 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 18:42:57 +0100 (CET) Subject: Java status (was: Re: Wine c.f. Mono) In-Reply-To: <43B7F9EE.2060501@adslpipe.co.uk> References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk><43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> <43B7F9EE.2060501@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Andy Burns wrote: >> Is Java encumbered by patents, really? Isn't it just the copyrighted >> reference implementation and testsuite that is the crux? > > You're right, I've never heard of Sun making any threats about 3rd party > implementation, just binary distribution and limitations on source access. While we're talking about it, does anyone know: As far as I understood, IBM (and others) approached Sun to have them Open Source their reference implementation of Java. The answer was "no", to which IBM et al responded by throwing developers at libgcj, classpath and friends so they really started to catch up. Was this how the rapid development of libgcj and friends came about or was it a "natural process" i.e som critical momentum or so? Linus From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Jan 1 17:59:06 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:59:06 +0200 Subject: *-debuginfo Requires In-Reply-To: References: <20051231135540.GA23054@ryoko.camperquake.de> <20051231184115.3fc8bce4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136138346.30090.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 15:00 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:55:40 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote: > > >>I noticed today that (at least in Extras) -debuginfo does not > >>Require to be installed. Is there a usecase for that? > > > That dependency would not be complete either, since package > > %{name}-debuginfo may contain debug information for all sub-packages, too. > > At least having the base pkg installed is better than none at all. A "base package" with the same NEVR as the source rpm doesn't necessarily exist at all. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 1 18:27:42 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:27:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060101182742.190557FDC@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 12 R-2.2.1-1.fc3 R-2.2.1-2.fc3 TeXmacs-1.0.6-1.fc3 abcm2ps-4.12.3-1.fc3 abiword-2.4.1-7.fc3 abiword-2.4.1-8.fc3 gtkglarea2-1.99.0-2.fc3 kmymoney2-0.8.2-1.fc3 lablgtk-2.6.0-1.fc3 ocaml-3.09.0-1.fc3 sbcl-0.9.8-1.fc3 xfce4-wavelan-plugin-0.4.1-4.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 Sun Jan 1 18:35:18 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:35:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060101183518.2AE467FDC@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 14 R-2.2.1-1.fc4 R-2.2.1-2.fc4 TeXmacs-1.0.6-1.fc4 abcm2ps-4.12.3-1.fc4 abiword-2.4.1-4.fc4 abiword-2.4.1-5.fc4 alltray-0.65-1.fc4 baobab-2.3.0-1.fc4 kmymoney2-0.8.2-1.fc4 lablgtk-2.6.0-1.fc4 ocaml-3.09.0-1.fc4 php-json-1.1.0-1.fc4 sbcl-0.9.8-1.fc4 xfce4-wavelan-plugin-0.4.1-4.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 Sun Jan 1 18:53:18 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:53:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060101185318.14FB67FDC@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 14 R-2.2.1-2.fc5 artwiz-aleczapka-fonts-1.3-3.fc5 baobab-2.2.2-3.fc5 baobab-2.3.0-1.fc5 gtkglarea2-1.99.0-3.fc5 gtkglarea2-1.99.0-4.fc5 kmymoney2-0.8.2-1.fc5 lablgtk-2.6.0-2.fc5 lirc-0.8.0-0.2.pre3.fc5 obby-0.3.0-1.fc5 ocaml-3.09.0-3.fc5 php-json-1.1.0-1.fc5 sbcl-0.9.8-1.fc5 xfce4-wavelan-plugin-0.4.1-4.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 Sun Jan 1 20:39:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:39:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601012039.k01KdZqj009613@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-01 15:39 EST ------- I have updated my spec file to address the comments given in this review. See http://www.canasoft.ca/fedora/geos.spec http://www.canasoft.ca/fedora/geos-2.2.1-1.src.rpm Specifically, - ChangeLog has been removed - doxygen files have been included in the devel package - XMLTester has been omitted as its simply a test driver - geos-config has been moved to the devel package I haven't included any patches to geos-config as the baseline version looks OK and is consistent with the upstream version. rpmlint generates no messages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 2 02:22:19 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 20:22:19 -0600 Subject: *-debuginfo Requires In-Reply-To: <1136138346.30090.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <20051231135540.GA23054@ryoko.camperquake.de> <20051231184115.3fc8bce4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136138346.30090.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 15:00 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: >>Michael Schwendt wrote: >>>On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:55:40 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote: >>>>I noticed today that (at least in Extras) -debuginfo does not >>>>Require to be installed. Is there a usecase for that? >>>That dependency would not be complete either, since package >>>%{name}-debuginfo may contain debug information for all sub-packages, too. >>At least having the base pkg installed is better than none at all. > A "base package" with the same NEVR as the source rpm doesn't > necessarily exist at all. Ah, good point. Relatively rare, but they do exist. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 2 02:19:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 21:19:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174275] Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601020219.k022JraQ027027@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174275 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-01 21:19 EST ------- (In reply to comment #23) > Okay so can you spin up a -5 spec file with the now correct buildrequires. Done. ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/nact/nautilus-actions.spec ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/nact/nautilus-actions-0.99-5.src.rpm Deji -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 2 02:53:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 21:53:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174275] Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601020253.k022raUA028292@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174275 jspaleta at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-01 21:53 EST ------- -5 builds in mock for development resulting binary installs 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 Jan 2 04:37:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 23:37:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601020437.k024bx3g001164@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-01 23:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) Package looks fine, except > I haven't included any patches to geos-config as the baseline version looks OK > and is consistent with the upstream version. The geos-config scripts is broken: geos-config --libs reports -L/usr/lib geos-config --cflags reports -I/usr/include Using -L/usr/lib and -I/usr/include in compiler calls breaks library rsp. include search paths, and therefore is never correct. (cf. pkg-config's behavior. It filters out -I/usr/include and -L/usr/lib). Possible improvements to the spec: * Append --disable-static to %configure and remove %exclude %{_libdir}/*.a --disable-static prevents the package from building static libs and building shared libs only (Should reduce the time required for building by almost factor 2) * Consider to append --disable-dependency-tracking to %configure This should speed up building the rpm significantly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 2 08:51:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 03:51:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601020851.k028pI4Q014574@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From matthias_haase at bennewitz.com 2006-01-02 03:51 EST ------- All changes are done and the changed files are there already: Spec Url: http://www.bennewitz.com/rpms/streamtuner.spec SRPM Url: http://www.bennewitz.com/rpms/streamtuner-0.99.99-6.fc4.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 Jan 2 08:59:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 03:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176434] Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601020859.k028x1vi015013@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-02 03:58 EST ------- Apparently FE's build system takes care of %{ix86} properly, as is also evident from newer builds. So the latest spec and SRPM are fine. Anybody who cares to 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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 2 11:01:17 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:31:17 +0330 Subject: Security problems in Extras Message-ID: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> I was wondering where the policies for security-related problems in Extras are mentioned. Currently, it seems that there are a few security bugs open for a while, with some of them (at least #169220, #169791, and #170045) needing attention. Also, one of the bugs (#175260) is private to Fedora Contributors only. Should this be followed for all such bugs? roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 2 12:10:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 07:10:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601021210.k02CAsIU002889@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-02 07:10 EST ------- Build for FC-{3,4}... devel does not work because of: preloader.o: In function `wld_printf': /builddir/build/BUILD/wine-0.9.4/loader/preloader.c:360: undefined reference to `__stack_chk_fail' preloader.o: In function `map_so_lib': /builddir/build/BUILD/wine-0.9.4/loader/preloader.c:734: undefined reference to `__stack_chk_fail' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Anybody gcc who can comment on 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 Jan 2 12:32:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 07:32:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601021232.k02CWO00004653@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-02 07:32 EST ------- Adding '-fno-stack-protector' to the CFLAGS should solve comment #113 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 2 12:48:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 07:48:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] New: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area 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=176780 Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ivazquez at ivazquez.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/wp_tray.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/wp_tray-0.4.6-1.src.rpm Description: Wallpaper Tray is a wallpaper utility that sits in your GNOME Panel Notification Area. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 2 13:24:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 08:24:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601021324.k02DOOvm008394@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 pvrabec at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From pvrabec at redhat.com 2006-01-02 08:24 EST ------- Fixed and checked with rpmlint. I hope licq package is allright 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 Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 2 13:32:43 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:32:43 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.459,1.460 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:08:10 +0300." <43B0318A.4070109@odu.neva.ru> Message-ID: <200601021332.k02DWhY1008805@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> buc at odusz.so-cdu.ru said: > The reviewer should focus on the package, but not on the bureaucracy... When I review a package, I like to have a checklist opened in vim and proceed nicely in order. That way, I'm pretty sure I don't miss any steps, ticking them off as I go. I don't think attaching said list to the review ticket is that much of a hassle, nor does it have to do much with bureaucracy. I'd be pretty happy if that was standard procedure of the review process... Cheers, Christian P.S. And a very happy 2006 to all of you :-) From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 2 14:03:57 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 15:03:57 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.495,1.496 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jan 2006 05:06:13 EST." <200601021006.k02A6kWI030999@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <200601021403.k02E3vAS009179@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora-extras-commits at redhat.com said: > +Fedora Extras|wine|A Windows 16/32/64 bit emulator I thought 64-bit was off for now... ;-) From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 2 16:33:26 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 18:33:26 +0200 Subject: Security problems in Extras In-Reply-To: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136219606.15641.27.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 14:31 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I was wondering where the policies for security-related problems in > Extras are mentioned. Probably nowhere. > Currently, it seems that there are a few security bugs open for a while, > with some of them (at least #169220, #169791, and #170045) needing > attention. > > Also, one of the bugs (#175260) is private to Fedora Contributors only. > Should this be followed for all such bugs? I don't think it's necessary (nor good) to place any visibility restrictions for security bugs that are 1) not FE specific and 2) have been already disclosed in public elsewhere. #175260 is (was?) under investigation whether the fix needs to be revised, thus making it potentially FE specific if the answer to that is "yes". From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 2 17:59:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 12:59:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176784] New: Review Request: gnome-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at 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=176784 Summary: Review Request: gnome-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/gnome-schedule.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/gnome-schedule-1.0.0-1.src.rpm Description: Gnome Schedule is a graphical user interface for creating, modifying, and deleting cron and at jobs. This is my first package. I need a sponsor. Known problems: * Builds on devel only because of gnome-doc-utils requirement * rpmlint gives "only-non-binary-in-usr-lib" wich comes from Bonobo .server file for the panel applet -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 2 19:06:01 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:06:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060102190601.F030F8087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 5 jogl-1.1.1-12.fc5 kawa-1.8-3.fc5 new-1.3.5-3 perl-Module-Signature-0.51-1.fc5 scponly-4.3-1.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 Jan 2 19:30:59 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:30:59 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060102193059.3F6ED8087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 buoh-0.8.1-5 naim-0.11.8.1-1.fc4 perl-Glib-1.102-1.fc4 perl-Gtk2-1.102-1.fc4 perl-Module-Signature-0.51-1.fc4 scponly-4.3-1.fc4 tkcon-2.4-2.fc4 wine-0.9.4-4.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 Mon Jan 2 20:02:58 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 15:02:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060102200258.4B2678087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 perl-Glib-1.082-1.fc3 perl-Gtk2-1.083-1.fc3 scponly-4.3-1.fc3 wine-0.9.4-4.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 Jan 2 20:47:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 15:47:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601022047.k02KldO5011577@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-01-02 15:47 EST ------- The desktop file should be installed with desktop-file-install utility and BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils should be added to the .spec. The rest seems to be OK 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 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Jan 2 21:41:29 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 22:41:29 +0100 Subject: Security problems in Extras In-Reply-To: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <43B99E09.1020703@hhs.nl> Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I was wondering where the policies for security-related problems in > Extras are mentioned. > > Currently, it seems that there are a few security bugs open for a while, > with some of them (at least #169220, #169791, and #170045) needing > attention. > > Also, one of the bugs (#175260) is private to Fedora Contributors only. > Should this be followed for all such bugs? > > roozbeh > > Yes, Not pretty. I've suggested some time ago to form a FE security team and volunteered for this. The offer still stands. 169791 looks easy to fix as its fixed in upstream CVS I could extract the relevant part out of their CVS and attach a patch to BZ, also there are many newer upstream versions available which might contain the fix. This bug is an excellent example of why we need a security policy and a couple of people doing security work. Regards, Hans From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 2 21:59:07 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:59:07 +0200 Subject: Security problems in Extras In-Reply-To: <43B99E09.1020703@hhs.nl> References: <1136199677.3040.23.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <43B99E09.1020703@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1136239147.30560.6.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 22:41 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > This bug is an excellent example of why we need a security policy and a > couple of people doing security work. By the way, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/TrackingUpstream contains among some other useful resources a link to RSS feeds of bugtraq, full-disclosure etc which makes tracking them pretty effortless. While not replacements for eg. vendor-sec, they're better than nothing. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 2 23:43:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 18:43:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601022343.k02NhjGH024391@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-02 18:43 EST ------- Items fixed. http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/4/i386/SRPMS.gemi/mosml-2.01-5.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 Tue Jan 3 02:51:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 21:51:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175280] Review Request: perl-Digest-BubbleBabble In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601030251.k032pC02005565@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-BubbleBabble https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175280 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpo at di.uminho.pt OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-02 21:50 EST ------- APPROVED MD5SUMS: 4878d9431d3ec38af7cd7af8244ced61 perl-Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01-1.src.rpm 0e8ef3de82ae909cfaeddf8269140c17 Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01.tar.gz b445444d0535b90461e005fb350fac7a perl-Digest-BubbleBabble.spec Sources: * Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01.tar.gz: MD5 digest checked OK against CPAN copy Good: * Package name follows standard * URL and Sources/Patches url are valid * License verified (main POD page) * dist tag present * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * File permissions are ok * Builds without problems in FC-3, FC-4, and devel * (Un)installs without problems in FC-3, FC-4, and devel * No reported problems in http://rt.cpan.org/NoAuth/Bugs.html?Dist=Digest-BubbleBabble * All the Net::DNS BubbleBabble related tests were successful (prove -v t/05-rr-sshfp.t) Minor notes: * The README could be dropped: only contains installation instructions * Kwalitee problems (non-critical; distro improvements) http://cpants.dev.zsi.at/dist/Digest-BubbleBabble http://cpants.dev.zsi.at/kwalitee/32030 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora-extras at sasami.anime.net Tue Jan 3 04:02:24 2006 From: fedora-extras at sasami.anime.net (fedora-extras at sasami.anime.net) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 20:02:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Asterisk status? Message-ID: Has anything happened to asterisk in extras since https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-August/thread.html#00144 ? BTW the zaptel driver required for conferencing (and MOH) is ztdummy. http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-Asterisk+timer+ztdummy -Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 05:56:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 00:56:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601030556.k035uI0i024553@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-03 00:56 EST ------- Thanks for the tips. I've made the suggested improvements to the spec file and have included a patch for geos-config.in to remove -L/usr/lib from libs and -I/usr/include from cflags -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 10:16:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 05:16:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176817] 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=176817 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rkburra at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: SRPM Name or Url: Description: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 10:49:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 05:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175280] Review Request: perl-Digest-BubbleBabble In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031049.k03AngPQ018408@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-BubbleBabble https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175280 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-03 05:49 EST ------- Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. README removed (surprised I missed that one myself). Thanks for the 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 mihamina.rakotomandimby at etu.univ-orleans.fr Tue Jan 3 12:19:45 2006 From: mihamina.rakotomandimby at etu.univ-orleans.fr (Rakotomandimby Mihamina) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 13:19:45 +0100 Subject: RFC Zope 2.9 Package Message-ID: <1136290785.2875.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, I made a zope 2.9 package, and would like your comment on it, if you have time. ftp://infogerance.locataire-serveur.info/fedora/RPMS/i386/zope-2.9.0b2-1.i386.rpm The SRPM is here ftp://infogerance.locataire-serveur.info/fedora/SRPMS/zope-2.9.0b2-1.src.rpm -- A powerfull GroupWare, CMS, CRM, ECM: CPS (Open Source & GPL). Opengroupware, SPIP, Plone, PhpBB, JetSpeed... are good: CPS is better. http://www.cps-project.org for downloads & documentation. Free hosting of CPS groupware: http://www.objectis.org. From yyovkov at yyovkov.net Tue Jan 3 12:25:53 2006 From: yyovkov at yyovkov.net (Yovko Ilchev Yovkov) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 14:25:53 +0200 Subject: Fedora PKI Software Message-ID: <1136291153.4307.5.camel@ws-1> Hello, I am new in this list and I hope I have found the right list for my discussion. If it's not, please - excuse me! I have found an interesting software for management of PKI, but I an confused about the license compatibility with Fedora Core and also I am not good developer. The thing I am able to help is to test. So the software I am talk about is EJBCA, at the home page: http://ejbca.sourceforge.net/ I'll be glad is somebody is interesting in this area and for the future package improvement. Yes, I am also waiting for x-netscape certificate system, but I don't know how long it will take to become open source. Regards, Yovko Yovkov From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 3 13:39:56 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:39:56 +0100 (CET) Subject: Fedora PKI Software In-Reply-To: <1136291153.4307.5.camel@ws-1> References: <1136291153.4307.5.camel@ws-1> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Yovko Ilchev Yovkov wrote: > I have found an interesting software for management of PKI, but I an > confused about the license compatibility with Fedora Core and also I am > not good developer. The thing I am able to help is to test. > > So the software I am talk about is EJBCA, at the home page: > http://ejbca.sourceforge.net/ This homepage says: "The LGPL (GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE) applies to all releases of EJBCA". This license is perfectly acceptable for Fedora. Linus From yyovkov at yyovkov.net Tue Jan 3 14:37:29 2006 From: yyovkov at yyovkov.net (Yovko Ilchev Yovkov) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:37:29 +0200 Subject: Fedora PKI Software In-Reply-To: References: <1136291153.4307.5.camel@ws-1> Message-ID: <1136299049.4307.8.camel@ws-1> Thank you very much! Step one is finished. I will be happy if somebody who understand well java and jboss contact me with help to try to build some packages. On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 14:39 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Yovko Ilchev Yovkov wrote: > > > I have found an interesting software for management of PKI, but I an > > confused about the license compatibility with Fedora Core and also I am > > not good developer. The thing I am able to help is to test. > > > > So the software I am talk about is EJBCA, at the home page: > > http://ejbca.sourceforge.net/ > > This homepage says: "The LGPL (GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE) applies > to all releases of EJBCA". > > This license is perfectly acceptable for Fedora. > > Linus > From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 14:59:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:59:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175279] Review Request: gift-openft: Openft plugin for giFT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031459.k03ExMX9014923@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-openft: Openft plugin for giFT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175279 Bug 175279 depends on bug 175276, which changed state. Bug 175276 Summary: Review Request: gift: daemon for communicating with filesharing protocols https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175276 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 Jan 3 14:59:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:59:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175278] Review Request: gift-gnutella: gnutella plugin for giFT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031459.k03ExjIC015006@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 175278 depends on bug 175276, which changed state. Bug 175276 Summary: Review Request: gift: daemon for communicating with filesharing protocols https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175276 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 Jan 3 14:59:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:59:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175282] Review Request: apollon: Filesharing client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031459.k03ExvO3015052@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: apollon: Filesharing client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175282 Bug 175282 depends on bug 175276, which changed state. Bug 175276 Summary: Review Request: gift: daemon for communicating with filesharing protocols https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175276 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 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 3 15:39:34 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:39:34 +0100 Subject: rpmlint problem Message-ID: <1136302774.3087.2.camel@bureau.maison> I'm trying to package libupnp in FE and i have some errors in rpmlint i can't understand : E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libupnp.so.1.2.1 libupnp.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libixml.so libixml.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libthreadutil.so libthreadutil.so W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig Some help ? Thanks -- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 15:39:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 10:39:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031539.k03FdAIx021978@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 pvrabec at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From pvrabec at redhat.com 2006-01-03 10:38 EST ------- OK, .desktop file is installed with desktop-file-install and not via Makefile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 3 15:42:55 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:42:55 +0100 Subject: BuilRequire problem Message-ID: <1136302975.3087.6.camel@bureau.maison> I'm trying to package ushare which need libupnp to build. I submit libupnp to FE also. But when these 2 packages will be accepted i will need to build libupnp first and wait it will be released before building ushare ? Thanks -- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Tue Jan 3 16:36:31 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 11:36:31 -0500 Subject: BuilRequire problem In-Reply-To: <1136302975.3087.6.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1136302975.3087.6.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <1136306191.30392.17.camel@ignacio.lan> On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 16:42 +0100, Eric Tanguy wrote: > I'm trying to package ushare which need libupnp to build. I submit libupnp to FE also. > But when these 2 packages will be accepted i will need to build libupnp first and wait > it will be released before building ushare ? Build, yes. But you won't have to wait until it's published. The buildsystem also looks at packages in the needsign state. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From steve at silug.org Tue Jan 3 16:58:47 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 10:58:47 -0600 Subject: Asterisk status? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060103165847.GA17209@osiris.silug.org> On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 08:02:24PM -0800, fedora-extras at sasami.anime.net wrote: > Has anything happened to asterisk in extras since > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-August/thread.html#00144 Not that I'm aware of. I know it isn't the FE standard way of handling a new package, but I still *really* like the idea of importing somebody's spec into CVS as a base so that all of us who are interested in Asterisk on Fedora can work on it. 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 rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Jan 3 16:59:54 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:59:54 -0600 Subject: rpmlint problem In-Reply-To: <1136302774.3087.2.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1136302774.3087.2.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: Eric Tanguy wrote: > I'm trying to package libupnp in FE and i have some errors in rpmlint i > can't understand : > W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig > W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig Replace: %post /sbin/ldconfig with %post -p /sbin/ldconfig Likewise for %postun -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 17:02:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 12:02:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031702.k03H2Rhu005863@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 redhatbugz at adslpipe.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |redhatbugz at adslpipe.co.uk ------- Additional Comments From redhatbugz at adslpipe.co.uk 2006-01-03 12:02 EST ------- These files were there 10 minutes ago, now they're gone :-( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 17:35:56 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 12:35:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060103173556.A91D78087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 8 centericq-4.21.0-3.fc3 keychain-2.6.1-1.fc3 pbzip2-0.9.5-1.fc3 pl-5.6.0-1.fc3 rxvt-unicode-6.2-1.fc3 tkcvs-8.0-2.fc3 xfce4-battery-plugin-0.3.0-4.fc3 xsupplicant-1.2.2-7.fc3 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 Tue Jan 3 17:37:00 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 18:37:00 +0100 Subject: seeing config.log for a failed build In-Reply-To: <1135455235.6408.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20051223091644.GC2856@free.fr> <1135455235.6408.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060103173700.GB2713@free.fr> > Are there any other files (like config.log) that are almost certainly > going to be there for most packages that should be picked up as well? I don't know, but maybe it could be possible to give a list of files that should be preserved during the build? It is not obvious that such a feature is really worth it, because it would imply a way to communicate this list to the buildsys. A file checked in CVS seems to me the best choice. The drawback is that it implies lots of cvs commits when the files kept are changed to debug something. Another issue is that the build directory structure should be kept for those files. -- Pat From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 3 17:44:03 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 12:44:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060103174403.0D6BC8087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 9 centericq-4.21.0-3.fc4 geomview-1.8.2-0.1.cvs20040221.fc4 nautilus-actions-0.99-6.fc4 pbzip2-0.9.5-1.fc4 pl-5.6.0-1.fc4 rxvt-unicode-6.2-1.fc4 tkcvs-8.0-2.fc4 xfce4-battery-plugin-0.3.0-4.fc4 xsupplicant-1.2.2-7.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 3 17:06:58 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:06:58 +0100 Subject: rpmlint problem In-Reply-To: References: <1136302774.3087.2.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <1136308018.3087.10.camel@bureau.maison> Le mardi 03 janvier 2006 ? 10:59 -0600, Rex Dieter a ?crit : > Eric Tanguy wrote: > > I'm trying to package libupnp in FE and i have some errors in rpmlint i > > can't understand : > > > W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig > > W: libupnp one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig > > > Replace: > > %post > /sbin/ldconfig > > with > > %post -p /sbin/ldconfig > > Likewise for %postun > > -- Rex > Thanks for your help! The main problem for me is the errors : E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libupnp.so.1.2.1 libupnp.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libixml.so libixml.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libthreadutil.so libthreadutil.so Eric From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 3 17:11:09 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:11:09 +0100 Subject: service init file Message-ID: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> For a new package i need to make an init file. I make it (see above). But the small problem is : when the system boot up the messages from all starting services are in french whereas for this service is still in english. Where this come from ? Thanks #!/bin/sh # # ushare This shell script takes care of starting and stopping ushare. # # chkconfig: - 75 25 # description: uShare UPnP A/V Media Server. # # Source function library. . /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions # Source networking configuration. . /etc/sysconfig/network # Check that networking is up. [ ${NETWORKING} = "no" ] && exit 0 OPTIONS="" prog=ushare DESC="UPnP A/V Media Server" [ -r "/etc/ushare.conf" ] && . /etc/ushare.conf # abort if no shared directory is defined [ -z "$USHARE_DIR" ] && exit 0 start() { echo -n $"Starting $DESC $prog: " daemon --user ushare $prog -D RETVAL=$? echo [ $RETVAL -eq 0 ] && touch /var/lock/subsys/$prog } stop() { echo -n $"Stopping $DESC $prog: " killproc $prog RETVAL=$? echo [ $RETVAL -eq 0 ] && rm -f /var/lock/subsys/$prog /var/run/ircd.pid } reload() { echo -n $"Reloading $DESC $prog: " killproc $prog -HUP RETVAL=$? echo } # See how we were called. case "$1" in start) start ;; stop) stop ;; status) status $prog RETVAL=$? ;; restart) stop start ;; condrestart) if [ -f /var/lock/subsys/$prog ]; then stop start fi ;; reload) reload ;; *) echo $"Usage: $prog {start|stop|restart|condrestart|reload|status" exit 1 esac exit $RETVAL From mitr at volny.cz Tue Jan 3 17:53:29 2006 From: mitr at volny.cz (Miloslav Trmac) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:53:29 +0100 Subject: service init file In-Reply-To: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <43BABA19.7090200@volny.cz> Eric Tanguy wrote: > For a new package i need to make an init file. I make it (see above). > But the small problem is : when the system boot up the messages from all > starting services are in french whereas for this service is still in > english. Where this come from ? >From translations in the initscripts package, which usually contain translations only for init.d scripts included in Fedora Core. Mirek From smooge at gmail.com Tue Jan 3 17:59:41 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen J. Smoogen) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 10:59:41 -0700 Subject: Fedora general improvements input survey invitation In-Reply-To: <43BAB6C7.4000509@redhat.com> References: <437D3B1D.7050007@redhat.com> <43BAB6C7.4000509@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090601030959n122a023eqac8ef91af50dd920@mail.gmail.com> On 1/3/06, Tim Burke wrote: > Tim Burke wrote: > > > The Fedora Core team invites you to participate in a survey to help > > identify the major ways in which Fedora can be improved for the > > benefit of the community. The survey consists of 10 questions > > involving Fedora Core and Fedora Extras. We are greatly interested in > > your views and hope you can share your thoughts with us. > > > > > Thanks in advance for helping us to make Fedora better for all > > involved. Upon conclusion of the survey, a summary of the results > > will be shared. > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > I hope you all had a great holiday. Sorry for the delay, and a sincere > thanks to all who participated in the survey. The results of this > survey are hung off the fedoraproject.org marketing page under a > feedback section. That would be http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Fedora for those who get lost in the wiki. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Fedora > > -- > Fedora-maintainers mailing list > Fedora-maintainers at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers > -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 3 18:13:00 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 13:13:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060103181300.3FC438087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 18 apcupsd-3.10.18-7.fc5 centericq-4.21.0-4.fc5 deskbar-applet-0.8.7-1.fc5 dia-0.94-19 geomview-1.8.2-0.1.cvs20040221.fc5 linkchecker-3.2-5 linkchecker-3.3-2 linphone-1.2.0-1.fc5 nautilus-actions-0.99-5.fc5 ortp-0.8.1-1.fc5 pbzip2-0.9.5-1.fc5 perl-Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01-2.fc5 pl-5.6.0-2.fc5 plt-scheme-300-3.fc5 rxvt-unicode-6.2-1.fc5 tkcvs-8.0-2.fc5 xforms-1.0.90-5.fc5 xsupplicant-1.2.2-7.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Tue Jan 3 18:14:55 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 13:14:55 -0500 Subject: service init file In-Reply-To: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <1136312095.30392.21.camel@ignacio.lan> On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 18:11 +0100, Eric Tanguy wrote: > For a new package i need to make an init file. I make it (see above). > But the small problem is : when the system boot up the messages from all > starting services are in french whereas for this service is still in > english. Where this come from ? The strings in the initscript need to be in a specific form. Look at the fyre-cluster initscript in the fyre package for examples. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 3 18:26:01 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 19:26:01 +0100 Subject: service init file In-Reply-To: <1136312095.30392.21.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1136308269.3087.14.camel@bureau.maison> <1136312095.30392.21.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1136312761.3046.2.camel@bureau.maison> Le mardi 03 janvier 2006 ? 13:14 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams a ?crit : > On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 18:11 +0100, Eric Tanguy wrote: > > For a new package i need to make an init file. I make it (see above). > > But the small problem is : when the system boot up the messages from all > > starting services are in french whereas for this service is still in > > english. Where this come from ? > > The strings in the initscript need to be in a specific form. Look at the > fyre-cluster initscript in the fyre package for examples. > Thanks, it works now with : echo -n $"Starting $prog: " for example. But if i want to add a description, how is it possible to add somewhere the translations ? Eric From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 19:21:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:21:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031921.k03JLlp4027464@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-03 14:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > These files were there 10 minutes ago, now they're gone :-( The computer hosting the files was reboot around that time, should be alright now. And as Rudolf noted earlier, the proper link is; ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xcompmgr.spec ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xxcompmgr-1.1.3-1.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 Tue Jan 3 19:23:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:23:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031923.k03JNGL9027774@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-03 14:22 EST ------- Oops, mistake again, sorry it's ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xcompmgr.spec ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xcompmgr-1.1.3-1.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 Tue Jan 3 19:59:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:59:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601031959.k03JxDvv001555@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 sopwith at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sopwith at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From sopwith at redhat.com 2006-01-03 14:59 EST ------- I tried to find a sponsor & reviewer, but a bunch of people are having trouble looking up that hostname, myself included. Please advise. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 20:15:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:15:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032015.k03KF1KY004443@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-03 15:14 EST ------- Sorry about that, our upstream provider has had an outage since about 8:00 this morning. I've relocated these files: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins-1.4.2-3.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 Tue Jan 3 20:19:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:19:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176855] New: Review Request: python-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives 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=176855 Summary: Review Request: python-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ivazquez at ivazquez.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/python-cpio.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/python-cpio-0.1-1.src.rpm Description: This is a Python module for accessing cpio archives. This should be a quick review for anyone that just wants to put one under their belt. Also, I'd appreciate it if a better Summary and/or Description was suggested so I could pilfer 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 Tue Jan 3 20:42:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:42:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032042.k03KgC6c008601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-03 15:42 EST ------- - Source0 should be a proper URL - Prereq should be Requires(pre) - -devel should also require by release - Commented-out logrotate script refers to cacti user and group, but these are not created anywhere nor is there a dependency on anything that does - Typo at --libexecdir - Typo at --enable-enbedded-perl - Is there a reason why you disable the initscript on runlevel 4? - Requires(pre): %{_sbindir}/useradd - Requires(preun): /sbin/service /sbin/chkconfig - Requires(post): /sbin/chkconfig /sbin/service %{_sbindir}/usermod - Requires(postun): /sbin/service - Recommend reordering %files so that the various directories are grouped together - Any reason why %defattr is used so many times? - Any reason why -devel doesn't just own %{_includedir}/%{name}? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dcbw at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 21:07:46 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:07:46 -0500 Subject: Extras' plague-server and %{ix86} In-Reply-To: <1135688772.3019.16.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1135688772.3019.16.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136322466.2699.15.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 16:36 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > We are having a discussion on > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 > > about whether or not the Extras' plague-server will build i686, > i586, ... versions of a package if the ExclusiveArch passed to it is > %{ix86}, which according to my /usr/lib/rpm/macros will expand to the > following: > > i386 i486 i586 i686 pentium3 pentium4 athlon > > It seems that Thorsten's plague-server actually builds an i686 version > of the package, while some packages in extras (like > athcool-0.3.11-3.fc5) use the %{ix86} macro and were only built as i386 > in extras. > > Would someone with more knowledge of Extras' plague-server enlighten us? The buildsystem takes the "base arches" that a particular target can build for (usually i386, x86_64, and ppc), grabs the 'buildarchs' RPM tag from the SRPM, and filters the buildarchs through the "base arches" for the target. ExcludeArch and ExclusiveArch are taken into account. It gets more complicated for subarchitectures though. The buildsystem has a feature called "optional arches" that packages can build for if the specify it. That could be set to 'i486 i586 i686', but then you'd end up with 4 x86 versions of every package that gets pushed through the buildsystem for those people that used %{ix86}. We clearly don't want 5 different versions of FE, one each for each architecture, because Core doesn't do that. So its unclear to me how to proceed with this. There is another feature called "Additional Package Arches" that allows other arches (like i686) on a per-package basis, which might be the route to go. But that feature requires server-side configuration updates for each change, meaning that packages can't control it. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 21:36:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:36:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176867] New: Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data files for python-basemap 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=176867 Summary: Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data files for python-basemap 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: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: orion at cora.nwra.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-basemap-data.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-basemap-data-0.7-1.src.rpm Description: Data for python-basemap -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 21:37:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:37:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032137.k03LbMO5017912@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 orion at cora.nwra.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |176867 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 21:38:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:38:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176867] Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data files for python-basemap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032138.k03LcjWl018266@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap-data - Data files for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176867 orion at cora.nwra.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-03 16:38 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 173778 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 21:38:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173778] Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032138.k03LcpMn018305@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173778 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-03 16:38 EST ------- *** Bug 176867 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 Jan 3 21:39:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:39:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032139.k03LdEuK018384@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 Bug 166506 depends on bug 176867, which changed state. Bug 176867 Summary: Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data files for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176867 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |DUPLICATE 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 Tue Jan 3 21:40:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:40:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032140.k03Le6CV018543@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 orion at cora.nwra.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn|176867 | ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-03 16:39 EST ------- Are there any outstanding issues here, or can this and the data package be approved? 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 Tue Jan 3 21:45:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:45:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176855] Review Request: python-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032145.k03LjQju019495@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176855 gajownik at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gajownik at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-03 16:45 EST ------- Sorry for a bit off-topic comment but how *.pyo files should be handled? In /usr/share/fedora/spectemplate-python.spec from fedora-rpmdevtools there is such a comment: # mark *.pyo as %ghost (do not include in package). but in your spec file and in some Extras' packages these files are provided in final RPMs. I'm asking because this problem concerns my package, too ( bug #176653 ). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 21:50:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:50:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032150.k03LoKVn020215@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 orion at cora.nwra.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |orion at cora.nwra.com ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-03 16:50 EST ------- Oliver - I can't find any of your src rpms. Please repost a URL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 21:51:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032151.k03LpAtX020373@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From redhatbugz at adslpipe.co.uk 2006-01-03 16:50 EST ------- > The computer hosting the files was reboot around that time Yep, got it now, built OK on x86_64 (warning about non-existant user using root instead) xcompmgr runs fine with xorg 7.0RC4 on radeon Section "Extensions" Option "Composite" "Enable" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Videocard0" VendorName "Sapphire" BoardName "ATI Technologies Inc RV370 X550" ChipId 0x5b62 Driver "radeon" Option "AccelMethod" "EXA" Option "EnablePageFlip" "false" Option "DDCMode" Option "RenderAccel" "true" Option "SubPixelOrder" "NONE" Option "ColorTiling" "false" EndSection xcompmgr loads, KDE with transparent/fade/shadows works ok, if rather slowly. one or two cases where single row of pixels not composited properly, I wouldn't know if this was xorg, kde or xcompmgr though. On a 3GHz P4 it eats 50% user CPU + 30% system cpu by runnign a fully cached "ls -lR /" in a foreground konsole, if running in a transparent background konsole it still eats 50% user but only eats 10% system, however it runs about 1/4 the speed. I'm sure that slowness is to be expected without using fglrx, but would be delighted to receive any magic xorg.conf tweaks :-) Is anything blocking this going 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 3 21:58:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:58:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032158.k03LwqW8021492@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-03 16:58 EST ------- Thanks for helping me review nagios. I've implemented all the changes from your comments except for one. When I try to run chkconfig --add nagios with the following chkconfig comment: # chkconfig: - 345 99 01 I get: service nagios does not support chkconfig However, when I run chkconfig against the same comment (minus the 4) it works fine: # chkconfig: - 35 99 01 Any ideas? -Mike -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 22:43:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 17:43:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032243.k03Mh8P0026794@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ultimateevil.org 2006-01-03 17:43 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) [trimmed for brevity] > # chkconfig: - 345 99 01 > > service nagios does not support chkconfig > > # chkconfig: - 35 99 01 > > Any ideas? Too many arguments to chkconfig. Check what chkconfig did. I bet it created a S35nagios in runlevels 2, 3, 4, and 5, and a K99nagios in 0, 1, and 6, and the 01 was completely ignored. Use # chkconfig: - 99 01 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 3 22:43:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 17:43:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032243.k03Mhn40026975@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-01-03 17:43 EST ------- Final review: * RPM name is OK * Source licq-1.3.2.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream * This is the latest version * Builds fine * rpmlint looks OK * Works fine Possible improvement: * Tag as %%lang the files /usr/share/licq/qt-gui/locale/*.qm 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 Jan 3 22:44:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 17:44:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601032244.k03MivWc027226@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-03 17:44 EST ------- Ignore that last comment, I have no idea how I expected that to behave :-) It's all fixed now (and disabled by default since it ships with non-working configs) http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-4.src.rpm http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.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 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Wed Jan 4 02:03:14 2006 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:03:14 -0500 Subject: Becoming a contributor... process questions Message-ID: <7dd7ab490601031803n643b029pd40e150785ae0034@mail.gmail.com> Hi All! I'm trying to become a fedora-extras contributor, but I find myself becoming bogged down with a question as to the exact process. I've been working off the Extras/Contributors page, and have diligently followed steps 1-6; reading, reviewing, putting up a sacrificial package for review ( -- BZ#175502). Step 7 says "When the package is APPROVED by the reviewer, that person will then sponsor you. *First reviews for new packagers must be done by sponsors.*" I inquired if there was any special way I needed to go about finding a sponsor, etc, on #fedora-extras, and was told that... "Candidates are eligible for cvsextras access only after they have approved packages in the Fedora Extras review process. After this point sponsors may choose to sponsor your cvsextras membership by judging your knowledge and understanding of the packaging guidelines and project processes." ...and later was advised to start reviewing packages and approving them (if merited). So, basically, I'm a touch confused as what I've been advised to do deviates from the documented process at several points, and as a result I'm not sure how to proceed and become a contributor. I'm perfectly willing to follow the process; I'm just not sure what it is at this point and need some guidance. Questions: 1. Is there a way I can say "hey, would someone please sponsor me!"? 2. Which process should I follow? The documented one, or the advice dispensed in #fedora-extras? 3. If #2's answer is "the documented one", is there a way I should be alerting those with sponsorship privs that this review request is out there? 4. If #2's answer is not "the documented one", could that be clarified on the wiki page, and additionally what would I do if the package was approved? Hand it off to someone? Again, I'm more than willing to follow the process, I just need some clarification of how to go about doing that at this point :) Thanks! -Chris From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 02:54:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:54:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040254.k042sIUP019908@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From ellson at research.att.com 2006-01-03 21:54 EST ------- The upstream sources are here. Graphviz-2.6 is already in Extras. I think graphviz-cairo is not yet in Extras CVS. http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-2.6.tar.gz http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-2.6.tar.gz.md5 http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-2.6-1.src.rpm http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-cairo-2.6.tar.gz http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-cairo-2.6.tar.gz.md5 http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/graphviz-cairo-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 Wed Jan 4 03:18:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 22:18:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176855] Review Request: python-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040318.k043IDbx022170@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176855 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-03 22:18 EST ------- I personally don't consider it a big deal myself. At the moment I have about 17MB of .pyo files, which is a drop in the bucket compared to things like the kernel or X, or even Python itself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 05:07:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 00:07:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040507.k04577xx032501@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-04 00:07 EST ------- - Source0 should be http://dl.sourceforge.net/nagios/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz - Extra space on --libexecdir - sed substitutions should be done in %build - The sed substitution on p1.pl could be replaced with an insert (non-blocker) - All of the files you list in the 2 %defattr sections (with the exception of p1.pl) already have those permissions, so you can combine them and replace with %defattr(-,root,root) and then merge redundant entries (e.g., %{_datadir}/%{name}) - The permissions on the doc dir are wrong, but I suspect that is because of the %defattr - %{_sysconfdir}/logrotate.d/nagios is not marked %config(noreplace) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 06:55:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 01:55:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040655.k046txkV011013@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-04 01:55 EST ------- Neal, have you found time to test the built package on x86_64 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 08:22:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 03:22:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176855] Review Request: python-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040822.k048Mu2K019246@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-cpio: A Python module for accessing cpio archives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176855 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-04 03:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Sorry for a bit off-topic comment but how *.pyo files should be handled? In > /usr/share/fedora/spectemplate-python.spec from fedora-rpmdevtools there is such > a comment: > > # mark *.pyo as %ghost (do not include in package). > > but in your spec file and in some Extras' packages these files are provided in > final RPMs. I'm asking because this problem concerns my package, too ( bug > #176653 ). Include the *.pyo files in the files list, optionally with the %ghost attribute. Without the %ghost attribute, the files will be included as normal. With the %ghost attribute, the files won't be included in the RPM but will be removed if they exist when then package is removed (and they might exist if root runs the application and the .pyo files get written at that time). Either way, the package cleans up after itself when it's removed. Your choice which way 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 paul at city-fan.org Wed Jan 4 08:30:26 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 08:30:26 +0000 Subject: Becoming a contributor... process questions In-Reply-To: <7dd7ab490601031803n643b029pd40e150785ae0034@mail.gmail.com> References: <7dd7ab490601031803n643b029pd40e150785ae0034@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136363427.14593.48.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 21:03 -0500, Chris Weyl wrote: > Hi All! > > I'm trying to become a fedora-extras contributor, but I find myself > becoming bogged down with a question as to the exact process. I've > been working off the Extras/Contributors page, and have diligently > followed steps 1-6; reading, reviewing, putting up a sacrificial > package for review ( -- BZ#175502). > > Step 7 says "When the package is APPROVED by the reviewer, that person > will then sponsor you. *First reviews for new packagers must be done > by sponsors.*" I inquired if there was any special way I needed to go > about finding a sponsor, etc, on #fedora-extras, and was told that... > > "Candidates are eligible for cvsextras access only after they have > approved packages in the Fedora Extras review process. After this > point sponsors may choose to sponsor your cvsextras membership by > judging your knowledge and understanding of the packaging guidelines > and project processes." > > ...and later was advised to start reviewing packages and approving > them (if merited). > > So, basically, I'm a touch confused as what I've been advised to do > deviates from the documented process at several points, and as a > result I'm not sure how to proceed and become a contributor. I'm > perfectly willing to follow the process; I'm just not sure what it is > at this point and need some guidance. > > Questions: > 1. Is there a way I can say "hey, would someone please sponsor me!"? > 2. Which process should I follow? The documented one, or the advice > dispensed in #fedora-extras? > 3. If #2's answer is "the documented one", is there a way I should be > alerting those with sponsorship privs that this review request is out > there? > 4. If #2's answer is not "the documented one", could that be > clarified on the wiki page, and additionally what would I do if the > package was approved? Hand it off to someone? > > Again, I'm more than willing to follow the process, I just need some > clarification of how to go about doing that at this point :) I think the non-wiki advice should have been more like "offer review comments (which anyone can do) for other new packages". Until you're a contributor you can't approve a package (and hence can't do a "real" review), but you can certainly go through the review checks and make suggestions for improving packages. This activity should be noticed by any potential sponsors. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 09:40:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 04:40:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174898] Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601040940.k049ehAB030914@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-04 04:40 EST ------- Please change the URL to http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTML-FillInForm/ Please change Source0 to ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/modules/by-module/HTML/HTML-FillInForm-%{version}.tar.gz Requires: perl-HTML-Parser normall you want to change that to Requires: perl(HTML::Parser) However - looking at the mock build.log - it seems that rpm picks that up itself, so the explicit requires should just by removed. Provides: perl(HTML::FillInForm) = 1.06 Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1 Requires: perl >= 0:5.005 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.6) perl(Carp) perl(HTML::Parser) >= 3.26 perl(integer) perl(strict) perl(vars) perl-HTML-Parser Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /var/tmp/perl-HTML-Fil lInForm-1.06-4.fc4-root-mockbuild rpmlint error on src.rpm: [mpeters at jerusalem result]$ rpmlint *.rpm W: perl-HTML-FillInForm strange-permission HTML-FillInForm-1.06.tar.gz 0600 You probably shour chmod 644 the src.tarball before building the src.rpm -=- * md5sum matches upstream * mock build clean (tested in FC4) * Appropriate License (GPL or Artistic) - matches tarball (as described in README file) * Written in American English * specfile name matches package * follows guidelines for naming of perl modules * follows example spec file for perl modules * proper and consistent use of macros * No un-necessary BuildRequires * cleanly installs / uninstalls (proper %files section) Fix the issues noted and I'll approve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 14:46:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 09:46:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041446.k04EkCwr002774@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-04 09:45 EST ------- Why is there a | Requires(postun): perl ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From icon at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 4 16:03:07 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 11:03:07 -0500 Subject: Feedparser license Message-ID: <1136390587.11055.26.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Hey, all: I'm thinking of packaging Mark Pilgrim's Feedparser (http://feedparser.org). However, it's got a non-standard, if FOSS-compatible license. Here's the text of the entire license: --- Copyright (c) 2002-2005, Mark Pilgrim All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 'AS IS' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. --- I'm thinking this is even less restrictive than GPL, so there shouldn't be any potential licensing issues with linking. At this point I'm pretty much wondering: * if I have overlooked something * what to put in the License: field in the .spec file (currently I have License: custom, but I'm not sure of the convention) Any suggestions? Cheers, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Mal: "Come a day there won't be room for naughty men like us to slip about at all." From tmraz at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 16:19:01 2006 From: tmraz at redhat.com (Tomas Mraz) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:19:01 +0100 Subject: Feedparser license In-Reply-To: <1136390587.11055.26.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> References: <1136390587.11055.26.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1136391542.3105.10.camel@perun.redhat.usu> On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 11:03 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Hey, all: > > I'm thinking of packaging Mark Pilgrim's Feedparser > (http://feedparser.org). However, it's got a non-standard, if > FOSS-compatible license. Here's the text of the entire license: This is basically the non-advertising BSD license with the third clause removed -> even less restrictive than BSD license -> perfectly fine for Fedora Extras package. -- Tomas Mraz From jamatos at fc.up.pt Wed Jan 4 16:25:11 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 16:25:11 +0000 Subject: Feedparser license In-Reply-To: <1136391542.3105.10.camel@perun.redhat.usu> References: <1136390587.11055.26.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136391542.3105.10.camel@perun.redhat.usu> Message-ID: <200601041625.11925.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Wednesday 04 January 2006 16:19, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 11:03 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > Hey, all: > > > > I'm thinking of packaging Mark Pilgrim's Feedparser > > (http://feedparser.org). However, it's got a non-standard, if > > FOSS-compatible license. Here's the text of the entire license: > > This is basically the non-advertising BSD license with the third clause > removed -> even less restrictive than BSD license -> perfectly fine for > Fedora Extras package. That looks like the MIT license... > -- > Tomas Mraz -- Jos? Ab?lio From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 16:30:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:30:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176943] New: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing 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=176943 Summary: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/rootsh.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/rootsh-1.5.2-1.src.rpm Description: Rootsh is a wrapper for shells which logs all echoed keystrokes and terminal output to a file and/or to syslog. Its main purpose is the auditing of users who need a shell with root privileges. They start rootsh through the sudo mechanism. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From icon at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 4 16:36:54 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 11:36:54 -0500 Subject: Feedparser license In-Reply-To: <1136391542.3105.10.camel@perun.redhat.usu> References: <1136390587.11055.26.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136391542.3105.10.camel@perun.redhat.usu> Message-ID: <1136392614.11055.28.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> On Wed, 2006-04-01 at 17:19 +0100, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > I'm thinking of packaging Mark Pilgrim's Feedparser > > (http://feedparser.org). However, it's got a non-standard, if > > FOSS-compatible license. Here's the text of the entire license: > > This is basically the non-advertising BSD license with the third clause > removed -> even less restrictive than BSD license -> perfectly fine for > Fedora Extras package. "BSD-ish" sounds good enough for me. :) Cheers, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Zoe: "Do you really think any of us are gonna get through this?" Jayne: "... I might..." From qspencer at ieee.org Wed Jan 4 16:44:23 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:44:23 -0600 Subject: Extras' plague-server and %{ix86} In-Reply-To: <1136322466.2699.15.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> References: <1135688772.3019.16.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136322466.2699.15.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <43BBFB67.7080102@ieee.org> Dan Williams wrote: >On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 16:36 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > >>We are having a discussion on >> >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 >> >>about whether or not the Extras' plague-server will build i686, >>i586, ... versions of a package if the ExclusiveArch passed to it is >>%{ix86}, which according to my /usr/lib/rpm/macros will expand to the >>following: >> >> i386 i486 i586 i686 pentium3 pentium4 athlon >> >>It seems that Thorsten's plague-server actually builds an i686 version >>of the package, while some packages in extras (like >>athcool-0.3.11-3.fc5) use the %{ix86} macro and were only built as i386 >>in extras. >> >>Would someone with more knowledge of Extras' plague-server enlighten us? >> >> > >The buildsystem takes the "base arches" that a particular target can >build for (usually i386, x86_64, and ppc), grabs the 'buildarchs' RPM >tag from the SRPM, and filters the buildarchs through the "base arches" >for the target. ExcludeArch and ExclusiveArch are taken into account. > >It gets more complicated for subarchitectures though. The buildsystem >has a feature called "optional arches" that packages can build for if >the specify it. That could be set to 'i486 i586 i686', but then you'd >end up with 4 x86 versions of every package that gets pushed through the >buildsystem for those people that used %{ix86}. > >We clearly don't want 5 different versions of FE, one each for each >architecture, because Core doesn't do that. So its unclear to me how to >proceed with this. There is another feature called "Additional Package >Arches" that allows other arches (like i686) on a per-package basis, >which might be the route to go. But that feature requires server-side >configuration updates for each change, meaning that packages can't >control it. > > I would like to see something like this. I agree we don't want an unnecessary proliferation of packages, but for some packages it is justified. I maintain atlas, which is a speed-optimized replacement for the blas and lapack math libraries. Currently the package provides subarch-optimized libraries using subpackages with names like atlas-sse2, but the user has to know about their existence. In the future, it would be really nice to have a mechanism to specify subarchitectures. -Quentin From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 16:47:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176946] New: Review Request: python-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in 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=176946 Summary: Review Request: python-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in Python Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: icon at fedoraproject.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-feedparser.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-feedparser-4.0.2-1.src.rpm Description: Universal Feed Parser is a Python module for downloading and parsing syndicated feeds. It can handle RSS 0.90, Netscape RSS 0.91, Userland RSS 0.91, RSS 0.92, RSS 0.93, RSS 0.94, RSS 1.0, RSS 2.0, Atom 0.3, Atom 1.0, and CDF feeds. It also parses several popular extension modules, including Dublin Core and Apple's iTunes extensions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 16:54:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:54:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171801] Review Request: libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk - libraries required for the fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041654.k04GsxBT025442@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk - libraries required for the fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171801 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-04 11:54 EST ------- Ping PFJ; your account seems to be sorted so is there some reason why there's been no activity on this, with the approval being nearly 2 months ago? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 16:57:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:57:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165688] Review Request: YAML-Parser-Syck - Perl Wrapper for the YAML Parser Extension: libsyck In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041657.k04GvUAd025810@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: YAML-Parser-Syck - Perl Wrapper for the YAML Parser Extension: libsyck https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165688 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-04 11:57 EST ------- Ping Oliver; this package has been approved for nearly 4 months. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 16:59:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:59:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168580] Review Request: perl-Crypt-DES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041659.k04GxF5B026135@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DES https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168580 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-04 11:59 EST ------- Ping Steven; this package is holding up a few others that depend on 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 Jan 4 17:20:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 12:20:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041720.k04HKr9r030472@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-04 12:20 EST ------- Thanks for your help on this, these changes have been made: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-5.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 Wed Jan 4 17:57:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 12:57:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041757.k04HvIQw007031@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-04 12:57 EST ------- * is '%{_localstatedir}/%{_lib}' really sane? nagios seems to be the only package using /var/lib64 and FHS 2.3 mentions only /lib64 + /usr/lib64. Have the libexec + cgi-bin files really have to reside under /var or would /usr a better place for them (dynamically created programs are looking a little bit hairy to me)? * the '%{_localstatedir}' macro is a little bit problemetic because its value differs between distributions (e.g. mandriva uses /var/run for it). Not a problem when packaged for Fedora only but '%_var' would be more clear. * I would add some '-p' (preserve timestamp) options to the %_install operations * I would add '|| :' to some operations (server-restart + usermod) in the scriptlets; at least in the %postun 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 Jan 4 18:02:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:02:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171801] Review Request: libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk - libraries required for the fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041802.k04I2esv008388@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk - libraries required for the fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171801 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-04 13:02 EST ------- D'oh! I'll get it sorted tonight - I've just been snowed under with work! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 19:18:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:18:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041918.k04JICat019766@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-04 14:18 EST ------- Most of these decisions I got from examples from other spec files. For example the httpd.spec and php.spec files use _localstatedir instead of _var. I've never used -p with install, what benefits would we gain from this? I've added || : to usermod but I believe service returns true regardless of whether httpd restarts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 19:24:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:24:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041924.k04JOhTl021187@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-04 14:24 EST ------- No outstanding issues. I am sorry I have planned to review this before but real life got in the way. I am running now a test that will complete the formal review. Expect it 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 Wed Jan 4 19:38:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:38:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601041938.k04Jcn1j023866@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-04 14:38 EST ------- * Mi Jan 04 2006 Enrico Scholz - 0.1.0.16-0 - updated to 0.1.0.16 http://ensc.de/fedora/tor.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/tor-0.1.0.16-0.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 Wed Jan 4 20:03:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:03:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601042003.k04K3u5a029991@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 jamatos at fc.up.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn|173778 |173779 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-04 15:03 EST ------- Review for release 1: * RPM name is OK * Spec name is OK * Source basemap-0.7.2.1.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock in x86_64 * rpmlint of python-basemap looks OK * File list of python-basemap looks OK * License is OK (GPL) * Spec file is readable, it is written in American English and it follows packaging rules. * BR are OK 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 Wed Jan 4 20:08:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:08:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173778] Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601042008.k04K8ZDQ030933@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173778 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-04 15:08 EST ------- Package review comming 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 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Wed Jan 4 22:11:04 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:11:04 +0100 Subject: UPnP A/V Media Server Message-ID: <1136412664.3029.15.camel@bureau.maison> I'm trying to package a simple UPnP A/V Media Server named ushare (http://ushare.geexbox.org/ ) but no one seems to be interested in reviewing it. No one have interest is this kind of software ? see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 Thanks -- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 22:27:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:27:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601042227.k04MRfGD023732@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-04 17:27 EST ------- All subpackages seem to build ok on i386/rawhide and ppc/fc4, and IMO there's no need to hardcode "i386", so I'd suggest changing all "%ifarch i386"s to "%ifarch %{ix86} ppc". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 22:45:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:45:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] New: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java 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=176981 Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: green at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext-1.3-1jpp_2.src.rpm Description: iText is a library that allows you to generate PDF files on the fly. The iText classes are very useful for people who need to generate read-only, platform independent documents containing text, lists, tables and images. The library is especially useful in combination with Java(TM) technology-based Servlets: The look and feel of HTML is browser dependent; with iText and PDF you can control exactly how your servlet's output will look. This package is required by RSSOwl, which I'm also about submit. The upstream package was maintained by the JPackage group. I've tweaked it to work with our Free stack, and to generate native code. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 4 22:50:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:50:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] New: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader 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=176982 Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: green at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-3.src.rpm Description: RSSOwl is a RSS / RDF / Atom Newsreader written in Java using SWT as fast graphic library. Read News in a tabfolder, save favorites in categories, Export to PDF / RTF / HTML / OPML, Import Feeds from OPML, perform fulltext-search, use the integrated browser. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Wed Jan 4 22:06:01 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:06:01 +0100 Subject: Alexandria and ruby Message-ID: <1136412361.3029.8.camel@bureau.maison> I believe remember that someone on this list was doing something about packaging this kind of soft. Is there any news about this ? -- Eric Tanguy | Nantes, France Key : A4B8368F | Key Server : subkeys.pgp.net Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) sur athlon kernel 2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 4 23:48:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 18:48:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601042348.k04Nm2GK004925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at conversis.de 2006-01-04 18:47 EST ------- initng 0.5 doesn't output anything at all but seems to boot but at the end of the booting process it just gets stuck. Switching to the second virtual console allows me to log in and most of the daemons are running but shutting down the machine again provides no output at all and then gets stuck too requiring to push the power button to restart the machine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 00:44:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 19:44:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175748] Review Request: cacti In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050044.k050iMUd012806@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cacti https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175748 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-04 19:44 EST ------- Welp, selinux and FHS don't always get along :-D I've moved all the log files and associated web files to /var/www/cacti/ until we come up with a better way to do it. SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/cacti/cacti.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/cacti/cacti-0.8.6g-7.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 Jan 5 01:41:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:41:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] New: Review Request: gstreamer010 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=176986 Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: redhat at flyn.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010-0.10.1-1.src.rpm Description: GStreamer is a streaming media framework, based on graphs of filters which operate on media data. Applications using this library can do anything from real-time sound processing to playing videos, and just about anything else media-related. Its plugin-based architecture means that new data types or processing capabilities can be added simply by installing new plugins. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 01:42:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:42:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176987] New: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-base 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=176987 Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-base Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: redhat at flyn.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010-plugins-base.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010-plugins-base-0.10.1-1.src.rpm Description: GStreamer is a streaming media framework, based on graphs of filters which operate on media data. Applications using this library can do anything from real-time sound processing to playing videos, and just about anything else media-related. Its plugin-based architecture means that new data types or processing capabilities can be added simply by installing new plug-ins. This package contains a set of well-maintained base plug-ins. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 01:57:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:57:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] Review Request: gstreamer010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050157.k051vHY8021994@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176986 johnp at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From johnp at redhat.com 2006-01-04 20:57 EST ------- This has made it into core already and will be built into rawhide tomorrow pending some issues with the 08 packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 01:57:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:57:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176987] Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050157.k051vjBu022072@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176987 johnp at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From johnp at redhat.com 2006-01-04 20:57 EST ------- This has made it into core already and will be built into rawhide tomorrow pending some issues with the 08 packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ndbecker2 at gmail.com Thu Jan 5 02:11:15 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:11:15 -0500 Subject: lyx-beamer Message-ID: There used to be a tetex-beamer package, but beamer was merged into standard tetex. Nice, but it seems the lyx packages for beamer got dropped? There is no source for installing beamer for lyx on fedora? I believe that to use beamer on lyx we need at least beamer.layout, maybe some more. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 02:11:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:11:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176988] New: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-good 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=176988 Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-good Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: redhat at flyn.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010-plugins-good.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/gstreamer010-plugins-good-0.10.0-1.src.rpm Description: GStreamer is a streaming media framework, based on graphs of filters which operate on media data. Applications using this library can do anything from real-time sound processing to playing videos, and just about anything else media-related. Its plugin-based architecture means that new data types or processing capabilities can be added simply by installing new plug-ins. GStreamer Good Plug-ins is a collection of well-supported plug-ins of good quality and under the LGPL license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 02:15:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:15:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176988] Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-good In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050215.k052FS5w024026@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010-plugins-good https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176988 redhat at flyn.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From redhat at flyn.org 2006-01-04 21:15 EST ------- This has made it into core already and will be built into rawhide tomorrow pending some issues with the 08 packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 03:08:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 22:08:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050308.k05380d7030678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 overholt at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |overholt at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com 2006-01-04 22:07 EST ------- There appear to be some changes in my spec file that I didn't publicize. I've put mine here if there's anything you want to grab: http://overholt.ca/rssowl/rssowl.spec Are you not going to natively-compile 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 Thu Jan 5 03:40:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 22:40:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050340.k053egFg004094@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-04 22:40 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > There appear to be some changes in my spec file that I didn't publicize. I've > put mine here if there's anything you want to grab: > > http://overholt.ca/rssowl/rssowl.spec Thanks - I'll have a look. > Are you not going to natively-compile it? I am. Did I make a mistake? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 04:19:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 23:19:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050419.k054JLqf012913@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 rc040203 at freenet.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |rc040203 at freenet.de OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-04 23:19 EST ------- Two minor issues: 1. Your patch had been cut in a strange way: --- tools/geos-config.in +++ tools/geos-config.in.new Please change this diff to patch the original file. [This issue doesn't get exposed when building the rpm, but does when manually applying the patch.] 2. geos-config --ldflags still reports -L/usr/lib Finally, in future submissions, please increment the rpm spec's Release:-tag when modifying a package during reviews. This helps reviewers to track the changes between different iterations of package reviews - TIA. Provided you add the changes mentioned above: 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 Thu Jan 5 07:27:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 02:27:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165230] Review Request: Eclipse Graphical Editing Framework In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050727.k057Rsht001070@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Eclipse Graphical Editing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165230 ------- Additional Comments From aluchko at redhat.com 2006-01-05 02:27 EST ------- Okay, it all builds (expect for a couple minor failures due to classes that are missing from libgcj), has documentation, and passes all the gef junit tests. When generating the debug info a bunch of messages pop up extracting debug info from /var/tmp/eclipse-gef-buildroot/usr/lib/gcj/eclipse-gef/org.eclipse.draw2d_3.1.0.jar.so extracting debug info from /var/tmp/eclipse-gef-buildroot/usr/lib/gcj/eclipse-gef/org.eclipse.gef_3.1.0.jar.so cpio: eclipse-gef-3.1.1_fc/java/awt/BasicStroke.java: No such file or directory cpio: eclipse-gef-3.1.1_fc/java/awt/geom/Area.java: No such file or directory cpio: eclipse-gef-3.1.1_fc/java/awt/geom/GeneralPath.java: No such file or directory ... Apparently this is due to an rpm bug that is fixed in 4.1.2 (fc4 is currently 4.1.1), Bug 161722 Here is the specfile and src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/aluchko/eclipse-gef-3.1.1_fc-1.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/aluchko/eclipse-gef.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 jamatos at fc.up.pt Thu Jan 5 08:56:28 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 08:56:28 +0000 Subject: lyx-beamer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200601050856.28183.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Thursday 05 January 2006 02:11, Neal Becker wrote: > There used to be a tetex-beamer package, but beamer was merged into > standard tetex. Nice, but it seems the lyx packages for beamer got > dropped? There is no source for installing beamer for lyx on fedora? Maybe the beamer layout could ship with the lyx package, no? > I believe that to use beamer on lyx we need at least beamer.layout, maybe > some more. Only the beamer layout is needed, AFAIR. :-) LyX 1.4.0 will be released soon, so it would be probably a good candidate to carry the beamer layout. I will post this issue to lyx devel list. -- Jos? Ab?lio From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 09:00:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 04:00:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] Review Request: gstreamer010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601050900.k0590JZJ013575@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176986 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-05 03:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > This has made it into core already and will be built into rawhide tomorrow > pending some issues with the 08 packages. All well and good, but it would still be useful to have the package in Fedora Core 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 Thu Jan 5 10:32:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 05:32:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051032.k05AWGka026863@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-05 05:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > I've added || : to usermod but I believe service returns true regardless of > whether httpd restarts. It will however fail if it can't find the service. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 10:55:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 05:55:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051055.k05At0hr030638@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-05 05:51 EST ------- Hm, the perl bit ist probably left over from the first spec... removed it. As to the -fno-stack-protector: Is it ok to disable this? I mean people using fc5 and fe for fc5 probably think that all packages use the standard cflags and the security implications that come with them... Is there a policy for 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 Thu Jan 5 11:14:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 06:14:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] Review Request: gstreamer010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051114.k05BEKKB000681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176986 mpeters at mac.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mpeters at mac.com ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-05 06:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > > All well and good, but it would still be useful to have the package in Fedora > Core 4. Yes it would. I agree DVD playback in totem does not work in FC4, for example - a gstreamer bug that is (supposedly) fixed in later gstreamer releases. Can this be re-opened for FC-4? I think it would need to be cooperating with the FC-5 developer to make sure that there isn't an FC-5 upgrade path problem (the fc5 gstreamer should obsolete/provide this 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 Thu Jan 5 14:03:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:03:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051403.k05E3Jn4023976@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-05 09:03 EST ------- * reported issues fixed * patches visited * spec file looks good * binary package contents look good * upstream locations verified (home page has moved to http://www.nongnu.org/streamtuner/ ) * upstream source is signed APPROVED The remaining unneeded dependency on desktop-file-utils can be deleted in CVS. If you have signed up for an account already, tell me your user name, and I will sponsor you. Else feel free to sign 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 14:23:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:23:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051423.k05ENZTA027367@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From ellson at research.att.com 2006-01-05 09:23 EST ------- Excuse me if there is pending progress, but I'm sensing a deadlock here? Is the review not happening because graphviz-cairo in not in Fedora CVS, or is graphviz-cairo not in Fedora CVS because of problems found in the review of the upstream code? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 14:37:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:37:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] Review Request: gstreamer010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051437.k05Ebx8d029775@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176986 ------- Additional Comments From redhat at flyn.org 2006-01-05 09:37 EST ------- The dvdnav and dvdread plugins have not yet been ported to gstreamer010. So even if gstreamer010 was released for Fedora Core 4, the library would not provide a DVD capability. Also, the CVS version of totem is required if one is to use gstreamer010. I'm not trying to obstruct things, I just want to make sure people have realistic expectations. At this point, gstreamer010 is clearly not Fedora Core 4 material. The gstreamer010 platform looks great but it will be some time before the applications and plugins are ported to 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 Thu Jan 5 14:42:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:42:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176986] Review Request: gstreamer010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051442.k05EgnZS030555@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer010 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176986 ------- Additional Comments From redhat at flyn.org 2006-01-05 09:42 EST ------- Just to clarify comment #4: the gstreamer010 dvdnav and dvdread plugins can't be shipped as a part of Fedora proper (in addition to not existing yet.) See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAQ/#head- b04c931c017de3facba9c69207925234df3c2232. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 14:46:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051446.k05EksBD031844@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-05 09:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #10) > .. or is > graphviz-cairo not in Fedora CVS because of problems found in the review of the > upstream code? As far as my comment in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666#c4 is concerned, it still applies to the current package. I regret having to say this, but *I* am not going to approve this package without this issue having been fixed. This doesn't mean I will block others from approving 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 Thu Jan 5 14:48:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:48:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168310] Review Request: swish-e In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051448.k05Emvbs032436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-05 09:48 EST ------- The intention of my comments was to offer help, to report several problems and bugs in the initial packaging, and to point out that the imported package didn't even build. Once it would build at least, my hope was that those who had worked on packaging swish-e before, would join and add final comments. The reason I never advanced to actual reviewing the package alone is the high number of comments and revisions done by the packager and the continuing number of unsual issues. The procedure in this ticket is very different from saying "here is a package ready for review". This thing is a constantly moving target. See comment 46. 62 comments, and only 6 are mine. Searching for actual answers to questions in all this flood is tiresome. The additional periodic pressure on volunteer resources (comment 52, comment 7) is simply not nice either. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 14:57:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:57:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051457.k05EvOjA002108@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-05 09:57 EST ------- You should _at least_ try to convince Ralf as why something he points out as being "questionable" or "broken" is found in the packaging and/or in upstream's tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 15:07:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:07:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051507.k05F7p1P004111@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From ellson at research.att.com 2006-01-05 10:07 EST ------- That bug in comment#4 was in the graphviz package, not graphviz-cairo, and it was fixed long ago in the devel and FC-* spec - although perhaps it was not fixed properly in the RHL-8, RHL-9 specs ?? Oliver? Fedora Extras CVS currently contains: ellson at ontap:graphviz> grep transform */*spec FC-1/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg FC-2/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg FC-3/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg FC-4/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg RHL-8/graphviz.spec: transform='s,x,x,' \ RHL-8/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg RHL-9/graphviz.spec: transform='s,x,x,' \ RHL-9/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg devel/graphviz.spec:- Removed "transform='s,x,x,'" configure arg I suppose the bug may still exist in the .spec in the upstream src.rpm for graphviz-2.6, but that spec isn't used in Fedora, and the bug has definitely been fixed in the HEAD sources. graphviz-2.6 is already in extras. This discussion was supposed to be about graphviz-cairo which is not yet in 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 Thu Jan 5 15:13:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:13:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051513.k05FDnaa005020@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-05 10:13 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > There appear to be some changes in my spec file that I didn't publicize. I've > put mine here if there's anything you want to grab: > > http://overholt.ca/rssowl/rssowl.spec It looks like the main change was to fix the arch reference in the startup script. I had avoided that whole problem by referring to the swt jar file in /usr/share/java. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 5 15:30:02 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:30:02 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060105153002.D83F38087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 9 clisp-2.37-2.fc3 lib3ds-1.2.0-6.fc3 nautilus-actions-0.99-7.1.fc3 ocaml-3.09.1-1.fc3 perl-Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01-2.fc3 perl-File-Tail-0.99.3-2.fc3 rpy-0.4.6-4.fc3 rxvt-unicode-6.3-1.fc3 wine-0.9.4-5.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 Thu Jan 5 15:28:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:28:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051528.k05FSZ1Y007232@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-05 10:28 EST ------- Thats interesting I didn't know that :-D, I've included the || : changes. SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-6.src.rpm SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 5 15:37:55 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:37:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060105153755.BD4028087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 14 clisp-2.37-2.fc4 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.7-1.fc4 geomview-1.8.2-0.2.cvs20040221.fc4.1 lib3ds-1.2.0-6.fc4 libeXosip2-2.2.2-2.fc4 meanwhile-1.0.2-1.fc4 net6-1.2.2-1.fc4 ocaml-3.09.1-1.fc4 perl-Digest-BubbleBabble-0.01-2.fc4 perl-File-Tail-0.99.3-2.fc4 rpy-0.4.6-4.fc4 rxvt-unicode-6.3-1.fc4 wine-0.9.4-5.fc4 xforms-1.0.90-5.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 Thu Jan 5 15:38:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc & performance analysis tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051538.k05Fcp0d009077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-05 10:38 EST ------- Tested make check on rawhide, it doesn't work properly. One of the scripts needed patching just to work, and then it threw an error. I suspect that this application may rely on Linuxthreads, which are going away in development, instad of NPTL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 15:41:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:41:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165899] Review Request: pam_pkcs11 : PKCS #11 PAM login module In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051541.k05FftpV009846@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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_pkcs11 : PKCS #11 PAM login module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165899 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-05 10:41 EST ------- I'm going to wait for 0.6. Juan, if you'd be so kind as to notify me when it releases, I would be grateful. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 5 15:48:44 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:48:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060105154844.7D70E8087@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 22 abiword-2.4.2-2.fc5 clisp-2.37-3.fc5 epiphany-extensions-1.9.4-1 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.7-1.fc5 gdl-0.8.11-2.fc5 geomview-1.8.2-0.2.cvs20040221.fc5 gtkglext-1.0.6-3.fc5 lib3ds-1.2.0-6.fc5 libeXosip2-2.2.2-2.fc5 maxima-5.9.2-7.fc5 meanwhile-1.0.2-1.fc5 ocaml-3.09.1-1.fc5 openvpn-2.1-0.5.beta7.fc5 perl-File-Tail-0.99.3-2.fc5 python-basemap-0.7.2.1-1.fc5 python-matplotlib-0.85-2.fc5 pytz-2005r-1.fc5 rdiff-backup-1.0.3-1.fc5 rpy-0.4.6-4.fc5 rxvt-unicode-6.3-1.fc5 shorewall-3.0.3-1.fc5 tinyerp-3.1.1-6.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 Thu Jan 5 16:00:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:00:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051600.k05G0NvJ013794@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-05 11:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > That bug in comment#4 was in the graphviz package, not graphviz-cairo, Well, let me cite graphiz-cairo.spec I d/l'ed from the URLs you gave in comment #9, before posting comment #11: ... make \ DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT \ docdir=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name} \ transform='s,x,x,' \ install ... All you are doing here is to move the "transform" from configuration-time to install-time. The actual problem is this package not applying GNU canonicialization standards correctly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 16:16:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:16:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175898] Review Request: perl-Text-CSV_XS - Comma-separated values manipulation routines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051616.k05GGKDm016510@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-CSV_XS - Comma-separated values manipulation routines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175898 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |paul at city-fan.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-05 11:16 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is same as perl, matches spec - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds OK on FC4 (i386) and in mock for rawhide (i386) - no explicit BR's needed nor present - 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 entry needed - no scriptlets Suggestion: - The compiler flags are specified twice: CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor make %{?_smp_mflags} OPTIMIZE="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" It'd be slightly neater to do it just once: %{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" make %{?_smp_mflags} Just a cosmetic thing really though. 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 Thu Jan 5 16:17:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051617.k05GHXBA016832@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-05 11:17 EST ------- Okay, you obviously missed the memo that talked about consolidating %{_datadir}/%{name} into a single entry. Also, since you own everything in %{_sbindir} you can just use %{_sbindir}/*. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 16:27:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:27:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165666] Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051627.k05GRocf018885@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Graph Visualization Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165666 ------- Additional Comments From ellson at research.att.com 2006-01-05 11:27 EST ------- I see, so I apologise, I didn't realize it was in that version of graphviz-cairo's .spec too. graphviz-cairo-2.6 is what it is and we're not quite ready for the next stable release upstream yet. Can this problem be fixed in the same way that it was for graphviz-2.6? i.e by fixing it in the Extras CVS version of graphviz-cairo.spec (which is supercedes the .spec in the package anyway)? How can graphviz-cairo be loaded into Extras CVS so that we can get past 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 Thu Jan 5 16:43:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:43:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174898] Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051643.k05Gh5E9021923@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 bkyoung at users.sourceforge.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From bkyoung at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-05 11:43 EST ------- >Please change the URL to >http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTML-FillInForm/ Done. >Please change Source0 to >ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/modules/by-module/HTML/HTML-FillInForm-%{version}.tar.gz Done. >Requires: perl-HTML-Parser >normall you want to change that to >Requires: perl(HTML::Parser) >However - looking at the mock build.log - it seems that rpm picks that up >itself, so the explicit requires should just by removed. Removed. >Provides: perl(HTML::FillInForm) = 1.06 >Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 >rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1 >Requires: perl >= 0:5.005 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.6) perl(Carp) >perl(HTML::Parser) >= 3.26 perl(integer) perl(strict) perl(vars) >perl-HTML-Parser >Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files >/var/tmp/perl-HTML-FillInForm-1.06-4.fc4-root-mockbuild >rpmlint error on src.rpm: >[mpeters at jerusalem result]$ rpmlint *.rpm >W: perl-HTML-FillInForm strange-permission HTML-FillInForm-1.06.tar.gz 0600 >You probably shour chmod 644 the src.tarball before building the src.rpm No problem, done. perl-HTML-FillInForm-1.06-6.fc5.noarch.rpm perl-HTML-FillInForm.spec perl-HTML-FillInForm.spec.6 Thanks, -Byron -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 16:44:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:44:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174898] Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051644.k05Gi9x2022164@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 bkyoung at users.sourceforge.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From bkyoung at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-05 11:44 EST ------- >Please change the URL to >http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTML-FillInForm/ Done. >Please change Source0 to >ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/modules/by-module/HTML/HTML-FillInForm-%{version}.tar.gz Done. >Requires: perl-HTML-Parser >normall you want to change that to >Requires: perl(HTML::Parser) >However - looking at the mock build.log - it seems that rpm picks that up >itself, so the explicit requires should just by removed. Removed. >Provides: perl(HTML::FillInForm) = 1.06 >Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 >rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1 >Requires: perl >= 0:5.005 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.6) perl(Carp) >perl(HTML::Parser) >= 3.26 perl(integer) perl(strict) perl(vars) >perl-HTML-Parser >Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files >/var/tmp/perl-HTML-FillInForm-1.06-4.fc4-root-mockbuild >rpmlint error on src.rpm: >[mpeters at jerusalem result]$ rpmlint *.rpm >W: perl-HTML-FillInForm strange-permission HTML-FillInForm-1.06.tar.gz 0600 >You probably shour chmod 644 the src.tarball before building the src.rpm No problem, done. perl-HTML-FillInForm-1.06-6.fc5.noarch.rpm perl-HTML-FillInForm.spec perl-HTML-FillInForm.spec.6 Thanks, -Byron -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 16:47:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 11:47:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051647.k05GlJ60022765@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-05 11:47 EST ------- Sorry bout that, I've made that change now: SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-7.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 rmo at sunnmore.net Thu Jan 5 17:05:05 2006 From: rmo at sunnmore.net (Roy-Magne Mo) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:05:05 +0100 Subject: Asterisk status? In-Reply-To: <20060103165847.GA17209@osiris.silug.org> References: <20060103165847.GA17209@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <43BD51C1.4070903@sunnmore.net> Steven Pritchard wrote: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 08:02:24PM -0800, fedora-extras at sasami.anime.net wrote: >> Has anything happened to asterisk in extras since >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-August/thread.html#00144 > > Not that I'm aware of. > > I know it isn't the FE standard way of handling a new package, but I > still *really* like the idea of importing somebody's spec into CVS as > a base so that all of us who are interested in Asterisk on Fedora can > work on it. I have updated the package from Matthias Saou/RPMForge to the 1.2.1 version of asterisk and zaptel for FC4, seems to work fine for me. I would gladly contribute my changes back, but I like to fix a couple of things first. But could really these packages go into Fedora Extras, as there are mp3-files and a mp3 decoder in the asterisk package? -- Roy-Magne Mo From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 17:03:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:03:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177036] New: Review Request: perl-String-CRC32 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=177036 Summary: Review Request: perl-String-CRC32 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-String-CRC32/perl-String-CRC32.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-String-CRC32/perl-String-CRC32-1.3-1.src.rpm Description: The CRC32 module calculates CRC sums of 32 bit lengths. It generates the same CRC values as ZMODEM, PKZIP, PICCHECK and many others. Despite its name, this module is able to compute the checksum of files as well as strings. Note: perl-String-CRC32 is already in rawhide, so this package will only be in Extras for the FC-3 and FC-4 branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 5 17:15:29 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:15:29 -0600 Subject: Asterisk status? In-Reply-To: <43BD51C1.4070903@sunnmore.net> References: <20060103165847.GA17209@osiris.silug.org> <43BD51C1.4070903@sunnmore.net> Message-ID: Roy-Magne Mo wrote: > I have updated the package from Matthias Saou/RPMForge to the 1.2.1 > version of asterisk and zaptel for FC4, seems to work fine for me. I > would gladly contribute my changes back, but I like to fix a couple of > things first. > > But could really these packages go into Fedora Extras, as there are > mp3-files and a mp3 decoder in the asterisk package? If that's the case, no, Fedora Extras cannot distribute it. The mp3 decoder, in particular, would need to be removed. Ideally, If the mp3 decoder bits could be modularized (ie, contained in a separately installed subpkg), then those bit(s) could be hosted elsewhere. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 17:14:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:14:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177037] New: Review Request: perl-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes 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=177037 Summary: Review Request: perl-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Clone.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Clone-0.18-1.src.rpm Description: This module provides a clone() method which makes recursive copies of nested hash, array, scalar and reference types, including tied variables and objects. clone() takes a scalar argument and an optional parameter that can be used to limit the depth of the copy. To duplicate lists, arrays or hashes, pass them in by reference. NOTE: This module is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 17:21:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:21:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168310] Review Request: swish-e In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051721.k05HLsqg028903@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bkyoung at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-05 12:21 EST ------- Communication is important to the success of any endeavor. The outcome of this one would indicate a communication deficiency from the start. I should have clearly stated my intentions. What is important is that the intentions of all involved was to get the package to meet all requirements. In my opinion, the package does (or at least the ones I know about), plus adds benefit to the entire Fedora Community by providing documentation search services for those who wish to install the swish-e-default sub package. At this point, the package is about the best I can do. If packagers/ reviewers approve the package and approve searching the documentation in this manner, and would like to adjust their HTML documentation to be included, then they are free to do so. Cheers, -Byron -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 17:21:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:21:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173778] Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051721.k05HLr94028898@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173778 jamatos at fc.up.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-05 12:21 EST ------- Review for release 1: * RPM name is OK * Source basemap-data-0.7.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock in x86_64 * rpmlint of python-basemap-data looks OK * File list of python-basemap-data looks OK * License is OK (GPL) matches the package and is included. * BR OK * Spec file is readable and it is written in American English * Package follows guidelines for python packages * package constains mainly data but that data is necessary to run python-basemap Needs work: * Specfile should be in the format %{name}.spec (wiki: PackageReviewGuidelines) You can fix this when importing the package. 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 Thu Jan 5 17:25:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:25:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] New: Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects 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=177038 Summary: Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version-0.50-1.src.rpm Description: Perl extension for Version Objects NOTE: This module is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 18:03:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051803.k05I3xsW003111@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-05 13:03 EST ------- Checked in and built on devel. Added to owners.list. Thanks for the 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 Jan 5 18:10:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:10:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173778] Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051810.k05IAPck004051@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173778 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-05 13:10 EST ------- Renamed spec file. Checked in and built on devel. Added to owners.list. Thanks for the 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 Jan 5 18:11:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:11:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166506] Review Request: python-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051811.k05IBZRY004327@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-basemap - basemap toolkit for matplotlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166506 Bug 166506 depends on bug 173778, which changed state. Bug 173778 Summary: Review Request: python-basemap-data - Data for python-basemap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173778 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 Thu Jan 5 18:16:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:16:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051816.k05IGsJQ005294@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-05 13:16 EST ------- Rebuild (0.10.2-2): changed all "%ifarch i386"s to "%ifarch %{ix86} ppc" Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/clearsilver/clearsilver.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/clearsilver/clearsilver-0.10.2-2.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 Thu Jan 5 18:34:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:34:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051834.k05IY4l4008592@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-05 13:33 EST ------- $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/libupnp-1.2.1a-1.src.rpm $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/libupnp-devel-1.2.1a-1.i386.rpm $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/libupnp-1.2.1a-1.i386.rpm E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libupnp.so.1.2.1 libupnp.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libixml.so libixml.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libthreadutil.so libthreadutil.so So no problem except with these errors about invalid-soname and i need help about 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 Thu Jan 5 18:35:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:35:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051835.k05IZha6008899@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-05 13:35 EST ------- $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/ushare-0.9.5-2.src.rpm $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ushare-0.9.5-2.i386.rpm E: ushare explicit-lib-dependency libupnp E: ushare non-standard-uid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-gid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ushare 0770 W: ushare non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ushare.conf Some help with explicit-lib-dependency and non-conffile-in-etc, please. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 18:42:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 13:42:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051842.k05Ig4fM010264@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-05 13:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/ushare-0.9.5-2.src.rpm > $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ushare-0.9.5-2.i386.rpm > E: ushare explicit-lib-dependency libupnp > E: ushare non-standard-uid /var/lib/ushare ushare > E: ushare non-standard-gid /var/lib/ushare ushare > E: ushare non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ushare 0770 > W: ushare non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ushare.conf > > Some help with explicit-lib-dependency and non-conffile-in-etc, please. You should be able to drop the "Requires: libupnp" because RPM's auto-dependency tracking should create an appropriate dependency for you. Use: %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/ushare.conf and that should get rid of the non-conffile-in-etc error. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 19:04:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 14:04:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051904.k05J4niv015327@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-05 14:04 EST ------- Thanks New version : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/ushare.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/ushare-0.9.5-3.src.rpm This package still need a formal 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 tcallawa at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 19:17:31 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:17:31 -0600 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change Message-ID: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: 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. This is a policy that has been enforced for sometime, but never actually added to the guidelines (until now). Thanks, ~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 bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 19:33:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 14:33:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601051933.k05JXIuh021430@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 mitr at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL|http://people.redhat.com/mit|http://people.redhat.com/mit |r/extras/python-4Suite-XML- |r/extras/python-4Suite-XML- |1.0-0.1.b3.src.rpm |1.0-0.2.b3.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From mitr at redhat.com 2006-01-05 14:33 EST ------- Thanks, all fixed in http://people.redhat.com/mitr/extras/python-4Suite-XML-1.0-0.2.b3.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 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 5 20:04:16 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 21:04:16 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > 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. What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may not be present on the target system) ? Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is installed before the new one ? Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not owned by anything on the live system ? Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 20:37:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 15:37:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601052037.k05KbIUT032673@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de ------- Additional Comments From frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de 2006-01-05 15:37 EST ------- Nitpicking from an outsider: Summary: Without trailing 's' from 'collections' it looks better, though I'm not an American English speaker. Also I would change Source0 to http://dl.sourceforge.net/foursuite/4Suite-XML-%{ver}.tar.bz2 or ftp://ftp.4suite.org/pub/4Suite/4Suite-XML-%{ver}.tar.bz2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 5 20:42:11 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:42:11 -0600 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> Message-ID: <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 21:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > > > 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. > > What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the > already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may > not be present on the target system) ? > > Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is > installed before the new one ? > > Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not > owned by anything on the live system ? > > Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like > filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? I'm pretty sure all of the FHS directories are owned by filesystem, so I don't think we'd need to add too much there... The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, as they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, though. ~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 mpeters at mac.com Thu Jan 5 21:12:36 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:12:36 -0800 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> Message-ID: <1136495556.2899.4.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 21:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > > > 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. > > What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the > already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may > not be present on the target system) ? > > Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is > installed before the new one ? > > Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not > owned by anything on the live system ? > > Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like > filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? An example of this would be tetex packages. tetex packages install certain packages with /usr/share/texmf/doc so that they are available to the texdoc command. /usr/share/texmf/doc is owned by tetex-doc - a very large package that many people don't wish to install. Perhaps /usr/share/texmf/doc should be owned by the base tetex package, but that's a core package - so the Red Hat maintainer would need to be willing to do that. Or we could allow tetex packages to create it as an un-owned directory (which I wouldn't have a problem with in this case) if tetex-doc isn't installed. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 5 21:13:54 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:13:54 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136495634.21116.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le jeudi 05 janvier 2006 ? 14:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway a ?crit : > The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory > structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one > (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, > and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, as > they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, > though. Sure it's a corner case. But the devil is in the details, so it needs to be documented (more than the usual case which almost no one gets wrong nowadays) 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 tcallawa at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 21:36:42 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:36:42 -0600 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136495556.2899.4.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136495556.2899.4.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136497003.15857.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 13:12 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 21:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > > > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > > > > > 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. > > > > What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the > > already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may > > not be present on the target system) ? > > > > Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is > > installed before the new one ? > > > > Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not > > owned by anything on the live system ? > > > > Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like > > filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? > > An example of this would be tetex packages. > tetex packages install certain packages with /usr/share/texmf/doc so > that they are available to the texdoc command. > > /usr/share/texmf/doc is owned by tetex-doc - a very large package that > many people don't wish to install. > > Perhaps /usr/share/texmf/doc should be owned by the base tetex package, > but that's a core package - so the Red Hat maintainer would need to be > willing to do that. Or we could allow tetex packages to create it as an > un-owned directory (which I wouldn't have a problem with in this case) > if tetex-doc isn't installed. You should file a bug and see if the FC maintainer is willing to have tetex own /usr/share/texmf/doc instead of tetex-doc. If not, we'll deal with it in FE. ~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 kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com Thu Jan 5 21:38:44 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 14:38:44 -0700 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136495634.21116.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060105213846.8A09E348475@ningauble.scrye.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >>>>> "Nicolas" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: Nicolas> Le jeudi 05 janvier 2006 ? 14:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway a Nicolas> ?crit : >> The only exception case is where two packages use the same >> directory structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the >> other one (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the >> other). Then, and only then, its acceptable for both packages to >> own the directory, as they both have the potential to be >> "first". This is a corner case, though. Nicolas> Sure it's a corner case. But the devil is in the details, so Nicolas> it needs to be documented (more than the usual case which Nicolas> almost no one gets wrong nowadays) An example I have of this is the munin package. There is a main 'munin' package that is only installed on a collector machine, and then a 'munin-node' subpackage thats installed on all the nodes you want to monitor. Either one or both could be installed on any given machine. They both use /var/lib/munin/ to store state and /var/log/munin/ to store logs. So, they both need to own those directories. One thing worth noting in this case is that both packages should have the same permissions and ownership. Otherwise the last package installed will override the previous package, possibly leading to maddness and chaos. :) Nicolas> Regards, kevin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQFDvZHm3imCezTjY0ERAiGuAJ958LagsNu3yLwdKZ4YG+kjE+ahHwCghxfU OMWAg2KQ+Opp3fBpRPhu9l4-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 21:40:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 16:40:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601052140.k05LeFaA011651@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-05 16:40 EST ------- A couple of final suggestions: - hardcode 0.10.2 instead of using %{version} in Patch0 -> maybe less juggling on upgrades - in %prep: find python/examples -type f | xargs chmod -x # see rpmlint output - subpackages don't have any interdependencies, so license files should be included in all of them Approved with the above changes (which can be done after importing to CVS and before the first build). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 22:01:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:01:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601052201.k05M1R8i014802@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ville.skytta at iki.fi OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-05 17:01 EST ------- Partial review: I don't think it's acceptable to run tracd as root. Please create a dedicated restricted user account for it in case you wish to ship it configured ready to run. tracd shouldn't be set to autostart by default. Replacing "2345" by "-" in the init script's chkconfig line fixes it. tracd init script lacks reload, status, force-reload, and condrestart/try-restart actions. See for example /usr/share/fedora/template.init from fedora-rpmdevtools. --daemonize shouldn't probably be in /etc/sysconfig/tracd but rather hardcoded in the tracd init file. trac.cgi needs configuration, suggesting something like this in /etc/httpd/conf.d/trac.conf: # Replace /path/to/trac_env with your trac root below, and uncomment the # SetHandler, PythonHandler, PythonOption and SetEnv lines. # mod_python: #SetHandler mod_python #PythonHandler trac.web.modpython_frontend #PythonOption TracEnv /path/to/trac_env # normal CGI script: #SetEnv TRAC_ENV /path/to/trac_env -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 5 22:04:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:04:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177065] Ownership of texmf/doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601052204.k05M4sPr015382@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Ownership of texmf/doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177065 mpeters at mac.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 mpeters at mac.com Thu Jan 5 22:10:18 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:10:18 -0800 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136497003.15857.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136495556.2899.4.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136497003.15857.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136499018.2899.6.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 15:36 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > You should file a bug and see if the FC maintainer is willing to have > tetex own /usr/share/texmf/doc instead of tetex-doc. If not, we'll deal > with it in FE. Bug #177065 From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 5 22:14:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:14:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601052214.k05MEgCe016777@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-05 17:14 EST ------- Actually, I'd recommend removing the tracd init script and sysconfig snippet and maybe consider not distributing tracd at all. I think that it just causes packaging problems and one daemon that doesn't really add any value; the CGI script should be just fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 00:20:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:20:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060020.k060KN7W003824@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 mitr at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL|http://people.redhat.com/mit|http://people.redhat.com/mit |r/extras/python-4Suite-XML- |r/extras/python-4Suite-XML- |1.0-0.2.b3.src.rpm |1.0-0.3.b3.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From mitr at redhat.com 2006-01-05 19:20 EST ------- Both fixed in http://people.redhat.com/mitr/extras/python-4Suite-XML-1.0-0.3.b3.src.rpm, 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Jan 6 00:28:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 01:28:09 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:42:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 21:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > > > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > > > > > 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. > > > > What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the > > already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may > > not be present on the target system) ? > > > > Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is > > installed before the new one ? > > > > Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not > > owned by anything on the live system ? > > > > Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like > > filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? > > I'm pretty sure all of the FHS directories are owned by filesystem, so I > don't think we'd need to add too much there... > > The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory > structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one > (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, > and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, as > they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, > though. The order, in which the two are installed, is irrelevant. Either one would own the directory in the RPM database. And the one installed last would set good directory ownership and access privileges. The order, in which the two packages are uninstalled, is the important thing. If the one, which owns the directory in the RPM database, were uninstalled first, the directory would remain in the file system and would not belong to any package. From thuforuk at yahoo.co.uk Fri Jan 6 02:11:08 2006 From: thuforuk at yahoo.co.uk (Dariusz J. Garbowski) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 02:11:08 +0000 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <20060105213846.8A09E348475@ningauble.scrye.com> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136495634.21116.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060105213846.8A09E348475@ningauble.scrye.com> Message-ID: <43BDD1BC.1040402@yahoo.co.uk> On 01/05/2006 09:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > >>>>>>"Nicolas" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: > > > Nicolas> Le jeudi 05 janvier 2006 ? 14:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway a > Nicolas> ?crit : > > >>>The only exception case is where two packages use the same >>>directory structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the >>>other one (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the >>>other). Then, and only then, its acceptable for both packages to >>>own the directory, as they both have the potential to be >>>"first". This is a corner case, though. > > > Nicolas> Sure it's a corner case. But the devil is in the details, so > Nicolas> it needs to be documented (more than the usual case which > Nicolas> almost no one gets wrong nowadays) > > An example I have of this is the munin package. > > There is a main 'munin' package that is only installed on a collector > machine, and then a 'munin-node' subpackage thats installed on all the > nodes you want to monitor. Either one or both could be installed on > any given machine. They both use /var/lib/munin/ to store state and > /var/log/munin/ to store logs. > > So, they both need to own those directories. > > One thing worth noting in this case is that both packages should have > the same permissions and ownership. Otherwise the last package > installed will override the previous package, possibly leading to > maddness and chaos. :) I have been hit by this. Here's bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176529 Regards, Dariusz ___________________________________________________________ NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 02:14:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:14:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] New: Review Request: metisse 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=177080 Summary: Review Request: metisse Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: fedorajim at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/metisse/metisse.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/metisse/ Description: Metisse is an experimental X desktop with some OpenGL capacity. It consists of a virtual X server called Xwnc, a special version of FVWM, and a FVWM module FvwmAmetista. Xwnc is a mix of Xvnc and XDarwin. It draws nothing on your screen; everything is drawn into pixmaps. Similarly to Xvnc, but with a different protocol, Xwnc can send these pixmaps (and other information) to a "viewer". FvwmAmetista is such a viewer; it uses OpenGL for rendering the X desktop into a window of a "regular" 3D accelerated X server. There are 2 dependant rpms required to run metisse nucleo & wm-icons -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 02:16:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:16:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] New: Review Request: nucleo 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=177081 Summary: Review Request: nucleo Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: fedorajim at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/nucleo/nucleo.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/nucleo/ Description: N?cleo is a toolking for exploring new uses of video and new human-computer interaction techniques. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 02:18:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:18:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177082] New: Review Request: wm-icons 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=177082 Summary: Review Request: wm-icons Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: fedorajim at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/wm-icons/wm-icons.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/wm-icons/ Description: The Window Manager Icons is an efficient icon distribution designed to be standardized and configurable. Includes several themed icon sets, scripts and configurations for several window managers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 02:34:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:34:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] New: Review Request: xmldiff 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=177083 Summary: Review Request: xmldiff Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: stickster at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff-0.6.7-1.src.rpm Description: The xmldiff utility extracts differences between two XML files. It returns a set of primitives to apply on source tree to obtain the destination tree. The implementation is based on _Change detection in hierarchically structured information_, by S. Chawathe, A. Rajaraman, H. Garcia-Molina and J. Widom (Stanford University, 1996). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Fri Jan 6 02:44:00 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:44:00 -0700 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136495634.21116.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060105213846.8A09E348475@ningauble.scrye.com> <43BDD1BC.1040402@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: <20060106024403.2D6BB3C0443@ningauble.scrye.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >>>>> "Dariusz" == Dariusz J Garbowski writes: >> An example I have of this is the munin package. There is a main >> 'munin' package that is only installed on a collector machine, and >> then a 'munin-node' subpackage thats installed on all the nodes you >> want to monitor. Either one or both could be installed on any given >> machine. They both use /var/lib/munin/ to store state and >> /var/log/munin/ to store logs. So, they both need to own those >> directories. One thing worth noting in this case is that both >> packages should have the same permissions and ownership. Otherwise >> the last package installed will override the previous package, >> possibly leading to maddness and chaos. :) Dariusz> I have been hit by this. Here's bugzilla: Dariusz> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176529 yeah. Did the update on 2005-12-24 fix the issues you saw? If so, we should close that bug. ;) Everything looks fine with all my testing. Dariusz> Regards, Dariusz kevin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQFDvdlz3imCezTjY0ERAp2cAJ4wEFQPxDaZimtW9+A2u2O3S102xACgkg6d APhiRfUVJ4QdyxRNNXN4LfQ= =u54S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 02:53:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:53:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060253.k062rBH7027973@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-05 21:53 EST ------- Sorry for the delay in continuing the review. :( >I really want to avoid the bloaty initscripts/lsb; they add lot of >stuff which is unneeded and there is no chance to modularize this >package. > >'initscripts' itself is not tight very much into the system; e.g. my >tor-vserver (with 'tor-minit') has it only because of > >| $ LANG=C vrpm cheese -- -e --test initscripts >| error: Failed dependencies: >| initscripts >= 3.94 is needed by (installed) pam-0.79-9.6.i386 >| initscripts >= 8.11-1 is needed by (installed) >hotplug-2004_09_23-7.i386 > >'hotplug' is brought in by 'initscripts' and I just submitted a bug >#176508 to remove the dependency in 'pam'. Well, thats your system... on my pretty much default fedora devel test box I get: [root at testbox ~]# rpm -e --test initscripts error: Failed dependencies: initscripts >= 5.83 is needed by (installed) glibc-kernheaders-3.0-2.i386 initscripts >= 7.22-1 is needed by (installed) rhgb-0.16.2-12.i386 initscripts >= 8.04-1 is needed by (installed) hal-0.5.5.1-2.1.i386 initscripts >= 5.86-1 is needed by (installed) kbd-1.12-12.1.i386 initscripts >= 8.11-1 is needed by (installed) hotplug-2004_09_23-10.1.i386 initscripts >= 7.31.11.EL-1 is needed by (installed) ipsec-tools-0.6.3-1.1.i386 initscripts is needed by (installed) bluez-utils-2.22-2.1.i386 initscripts >= 5.54 is needed by (installed) portmap-4.0-65.1.i386 initscripts is needed by (installed) xorg-x11-xfs-1.0.0-1.i386 initscripts is needed by (installed) xinetd-2.3.13-6.1.i386 initscripts >= 0:5.54-1 is needed by (installed) samba-3.0.20b-2.1.i386 initscripts >= 0:5.99 is needed by (installed) system-config-network-tui-1.3.30-2.1.noarch initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1771_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 6.38 is needed by (installed) quota-3.13-1.1.i386 initscripts >= 0:5.99 is needed by (installed) system-config-packages-1.2.25-1.1.noarch initscripts >= 7.73 is needed by (installed) dhcpv6_client-0.10-15.2.i386 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1773_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1776_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 5.20 is needed by (installed) openssh-4.2p1-10.i386 initscripts is needed by (installed) system-config-printer-0.6.146-1.i386 initscripts >= 6.75 is needed by (installed) dhclient-3.0.3-18.i386 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1777_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1783_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1800_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1805_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1806_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1807_FC5.i686 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.14-1.1808_FC5.i686 initscripts is needed by (installed) foomatic-3.0.2-30.i386 initscripts >= 8.11.1-1 is needed by (installed) kernel-2.6.15-1.1819_FC5.i686 /bin/usleep is needed by (installed) bind-9.3.2-1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) athcool-0.3.11-3.fc5.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) distcache-1.4.5-12.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) bluez-utils-2.22-2.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) acpid-1.0.4-1.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) vixie-cron-4.1-42.FC5.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) smartmontools-5.33-4.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) xorg-x11-xfs-1.0.0-1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) xinetd-2.3.13-6.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) spamassassin-3.1.0-3.fc5.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) rng-utils-2.0-1.9.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) irqbalance-1.12-1.21.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) cpuspeed-1.2.1-1.28.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) microcode_ctl-1.12-1.27.1.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) cups-1.1.23-27.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) cyrus-sasl-2.1.21-9.i386 /sbin/service is needed by (installed) yum-2.4.1-1.fc4.noarch /sbin/service is needed by (installed) munin-node-1.2.4-5.fc5.noarch If you have a need to remove that, wouldn't you just keep a local version of the package that doesn't depend on initscripts/lsb? No need to do that for every fedora-extras using box, is there? >Does not work because 'initng' and 'minit' do not need/provide a >pidfile. I find it also a little bit ... mmmh ... risky to send >signals to a foreign process just because its pid appears in some >file. Yeah, I got that from the httpd package, but I agree it's kinda odd. The reload in logrotate sounds like a fine way to go. The 0.1.0.16-0 version builds fine under mock and works great on my test machine. Anyone else want to give thoughts on the tor-lsb subpackage? Thats the only issue left I see on 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 Fri Jan 6 03:18:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 22:18:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060318.k063IsJA032626@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-05 22:18 EST ------- I've removed the obsolete MPL license text from the package. This was only included for the integrated itext.jar file, which I've packaged separately from RSSOwl. Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-4.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 Fri Jan 6 06:25:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 01:25:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177037] Review Request: perl-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060625.k066PO1T027271@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177037 rc040203 at freenet.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |rc040203 at freenet.de OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-06 01:25 EST ------- NEEDSWORK: 1. CFLAGS handling in %build 2. Remove *.bs C.f. the attachment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 07:32:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 02:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060732.k067WJ3T003055@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-06 02:32 EST ------- This isn't compiling correctly under mock against development. build.log reports: checking for mount... /bin/mount checking for umount... /bin/umount checking ldap.h usability... no checking ldap.h presence... no checking for ldap.h... no configure: error: Could not locate LDAP headers. error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.13491 (%build) -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 08:22:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 03:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060822.k068M9jK008849@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From luya256 at yahoo.com 2006-01-06 03:21 EST ------- Spec file looks good. However SRPMS file should not have "FC4" since %{?dist} already does the versionning. That also applied for both nucleo and wm-icons. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 08:42:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 03:42:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060842.k068gtJb012962@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-06 03:42 EST ------- New version: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs-0.9.4-1.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 Fri Jan 6 08:43:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 03:43:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060843.k068hKYM013080@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-06 03:43 EST ------- New version: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs-0.9.5-1.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 paul at city-fan.org Fri Jan 6 08:55:01 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:55:01 +0000 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136537701.28374.18.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 14:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 21:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > As approved by FESCO today, the following change to the Fedora Extras > > > Packaging and Review Guidelines is now in effect: > > > > > > 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. > > > > What about directories owned by already existing packages, when the > > already existing packages are not needed for the new package (and may > > not be present on the target system) ? > > > > Should a dep be added just to make sure the other existing package is > > installed before the new one ? > > > > Or do we allow packages to install files in directories which are not > > owned by anything on the live system ? > > > > Or should the shared directories be migrated to a central package like > > filesystem (or the equivalent for extras) which will own them ? > > I'm pretty sure all of the FHS directories are owned by filesystem, so I > don't think we'd need to add too much there... > > The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory > structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one > (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, > and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, as > they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, > though. It's not that much of a corner case; it happens all the time with perl modules. For example, perl-A-B and perl-A-C (if both noarch packages) may be completely unrelated packages and both will probably want to own %{perl_vendorlib}/A/ Another one: perl-A-B and perl-A-B-C, where the latter is an enhancement of the former, may both currently own %{perl_vendorlib}/A/B/. Now it could be argued that since perl-A-B-C depends on perl-A-B, it shouldn't own %{perl_vendorlib}/A/B/, but since rpm will remove the packages in an unspecified order if removed together (as I've been told in a package review recently), if perl-A-B is removed before perl-A-B-C then there will be an unowned directory left over. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 09:00:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 04:00:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060900.k0690w2S016806@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From matthias_haase at bennewitz.com 2006-01-06 04:00 EST ------- > If you have signed up for an account already, tell me your user name, > and I will sponsor you. Else feel free to sign up. My user name is 'endur'. __ Regards Matthias -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 09:12:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 04:12:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601060912.k069CJAA018208@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ville.skytta at iki.fi OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-06 04:12 EST ------- Some differences found in my local package, just skimming the specfiles for now: http://cachalot.mine.nu/4/SRPMS/xmldiff-0.6.7-0.1.src.rpm - manpages should be converted to UTF-8 - stuff in %{python_sitearch}/xmldiff/test is probably not needed - is PyXML really required? - xmlrev needs xsltproc and sgmlnorm and possibly docbook-xsl It'd be nice to run the test suite but the last time I checked, it needed some extra logilab python libs. See "python test/runtests.py". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 6 09:53:31 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:53:31 +0200 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136541212.31699.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 01:28 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > The order, in which the two packages are uninstalled, is the important > thing. If the one, which owns the directory in the RPM database, were > uninstalled first, the directory would remain in the file system and > would not belong to any package. For the record, I pointed this out in yesterday's FESCO meeting, and I gather the consensus was "let's get rpm fixed instead of continuing to work around its bugs". See eg. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/89740 and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/158577 From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Jan 6 10:11:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:11:37 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136541212.31699.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136541212.31699.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136542297.5382.303.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:53 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 01:28 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > The order, in which the two packages are uninstalled, is the important > > thing. If the one, which owns the directory in the RPM database, were > > uninstalled first, the directory would remain in the file system and > > would not belong to any package. > > For the record, I pointed this out in yesterday's FESCO meeting, and I > gather the consensus was "let's get rpm fixed instead of continuing to > work around its bugs". See eg. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/89740 and > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/158577 This decision is based on the assumption that * there is a strict and constant hierarchy in directory ownership * there is a strict and constant hierarchy in package dependency Both assumptions are wrong and subject to change at any time => FESCO is in error of making this decision mandatory. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 10:20:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 05:20:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177096] New: Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back 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=177096 Summary: Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: roozbeh at farsiweb.info QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/fonttools.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/fonttools-2.0-0.1.20060103cvs.src.rpm Description: TTX/FontTools is a tool for manipulating TrueType and OpenType fonts. It is written in Python and has a BSD-style, open-source license. TTX can dump TrueType and OpenType fonts to an XML-based text format and vice versa. Additional notes: 1. The reason for this being a CVS version is that the upstream's latest release has been in September 2002, while the maintainer has continually referred to the CVS version for bugfixes since then. 2. I prefer to name the package "ttx" (the name of the only binary the package provides) instead of "fonttools", because "ttx" is the name most users know this by. I stayed with "fonttools" because the Extras naming policy leans toward upstream names, and also because SUSE ships it (the September 2002 version) under the name "fonttools". 3. This is practically a binary and a module. I don't think any other application uses the module, but if that's the case, I may be able to make this two packages, one named "ttx" and another named "python-fonttools", or if I can name the package "ttx", I can add a "Provides" of "python-fonttools". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 10:24:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 05:24:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061024.k06AOX4e027194@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-06 05:24 EST ------- Added "Finalzone" to the CC for e-mail. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 10:30:56 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:30:56 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras Message-ID: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi all! After looking at several kernel module proposals in the wiki and long discussions on mailing lists and during IRC meetings the Fedora Extras Steering Committee (also known as FESCo) agreed on a standard for packaging kernel modules in Fedora Extras. Find the details below for a last discussion on this mailing list before this proposal is being used. Please note that this is a result of a lot of work and experiments. We had to make compromises here and there -- Read this as "everyone involved in creating this standard had to accept something in it that he did not like in the beginning". Please remember that in the flamewar ^w discussion that follows this mail. A simple "I don't like it" won't change anything -- even I did not/don't like parts of it, but I think it's a compromise that works and solves most problems fine. Find the details below; they are written in a way that makes it possible to put them in the wiki later. ---------- Kernel modules are a special case in rpm packaging and need careful handling. There are a lot of ways to package kernel modules, but for Fedora Extras the following solution must be used. That avoids confusion for packagers and reviewers. It hopefully also solves many pitfalls earlier standards in other repos had. It also should allow package installers/updaters/removers like yum to work smoothly with kernel module packages. The most important rule for packages with kernel modules: There are always at least two SRPMS -- one builds a userland package (tools, documentation, license, udev configuration etc) of the source, the other builds packages with *only* the kernel-module(s). The packager is free to split the userland-package further into one with a the general userland parts, that works fine without the kernel-modules, one with the kernel-module related parts and one with the kernel-module(s). The userland package with the parts that are related to the kernel-module(s) must follow follow the standard guidelines for Fedora Extras packages with one additional rule: - MUST: The package needs to require the belonging kernel-module with something like "Requires: kmod-%{name} = %{version}" Of course all rules that apply to rpm packaging in Fedora Extras apply for the kernel module package, too -- especially those around the licensing. But there are several additional rules -- instead of writing all those down FESCo created a specfile template and a rpm macro that is used by the specfile that handles most things automatically. Both are described in detail below. All kernel module packages should use the template as a base. Reviewers of kernel modules should diff the proposed kernel module packages against the template. Only the names and the way the modules itself are build should differ. There shouldn't be other differences without a good reason. Besides rules around the packaging there is one additional *before* you start packaging a kernel module for Fedora Extras: Open a Review bug in http://bugzilla.redhat.com and ask FESCo for permission if this module is allowed for Extras. This requires that you give at least the following informations: - Name of the package - URL of the project and a tarball of the latest version - License - A publishable explanation from the author(s) why the module is not merged with the mainline kernel yet and when it's planed to get merged. You of course can ask the author to explain it directly in the bug report. FESCo will look at those informations on the next meeting (those are normally every thursday) and will vote if the kernel module is suitable for Fedora Extras. If not it will explain the reason in the bug report for further discussion. For example ndiswrapper is not suitable for Fedora Extras -- yes, it is GPLed software, but it taints the kernel and most windows drivers won't work in the Fedora Kernel anyway due to 4K Stacks. Why all this? - The Fedora Project wants to encourage driver developers to merge their sources in the kernel - It easier for everyone if the modules are in the main kernel - There is often a good reason why the kernel developers refuse to merge a driver. If it's not good enough for the kernel, why should it be good enough for Fedora? - Most modules that are maintained independently of the kernel have licensing issues that also make it impossible to ship them in Fedora Extras. If the package is permitted for Fedora Extras start to write the specfile and post a review request. Everyone can review such a package, but after is was set to APPROVED by the reviewer a Fedora Extras Sponsor or someone experienced with kernel modules has to take a quick look at the package and post an additional approved notice before it is allowed to import the package into CVS. ---------- The RPM-Macro looks like this: {{{ # usage: %kmod_package $kmod_name $kver $kvariant(optional, empty for UP) # defines: %{kmod_build_($kvariant|up)} %define kmod_package() \ %{expand: %%global kmod_build_%{?3}%{!?3:up} 1} \ %package -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ Summary: %{1} kernel module \ Group: System Environment/Kernel \ Provides: kernel-module = %{2}%{?3} \ %{?3:Provides: kmod-%{1} = %{version}-%{release}} \ Requires: kernel-%{_target_cpu} = %{2}%{?3} \ Requires: %{1} = %{version} \ Requires(post): /sbin/depmod \ Requires(postun): /sbin/depmod \ BuildRequires: kernel-devel-%{_target_cpu} = %{2}%{?3} \ %description -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ This package provides the %{1} kernel modules built for the Linux \ kernel %{2}%{?3} for the %{_target_cpu} family of processors. \ %post -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ /sbin/depmod -aeF /boot/System.map-%{2}%{?3} %{2}%{?3} > /dev/null || : \ %postun -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ /sbin/depmod -aF /boot/System.map-%{2}%{?3} %{2}%{?3} &> /dev/null || : \ %files -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ %defattr(644,root,root,755) \ /lib/modules/%{2}%{?3}/extra/%{1}/ \ %{nil} }}} If will be added to the macros file in Fedora Core 5 but can be used directly in specfile itself if you are building for older Versions and/or other distros. This macro later expands to something like the following (with kmod_name foo, Version 1.5, kver 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4, uniprocessor Build for i686): %package -n kmod-foo Summary: foo kernel module Group: System Environment/Kernel Provides: kernel-module = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 Requires: kernel-i686 = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 Requires: foo = 1.5 Requires(post): /sbin/depmod Requires(postun): /sbin/depmod BuildRequires: kernel-devel-i686 = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 %description -n kmod-foo This package provides the foo kernel modules built for the Linux kernel 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 for the i686 family of processors. %post -n kmod-foo /sbin/depmod -aeF /boot/System.map-2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 > /dev/null || : %postun -n kmod-foo /sbin/depmod -aF /boot/System.map-2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 &> /dev/null || : %files -n kmod-foo %defattr(644,root,root,755) /lib/modules/2.6.14-1.1776_FC4/extra/foo/ Why all that? Let's go though the interesting bits in detail: >%package -n kmod-foo All kernel modules need to have the prefix kmod (that's a bit shorter than kernel-module) >Provides: kernel-module = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 With the explicit Provides depsolvers such as yum can know that it's working with a kernel module. You also easily can get the kver the module was build for with this. >Requires: kernel-i686 = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 A kernel module without the kernel it was built for is useless. Don't use /boot/vmlinuz-*, it's not portable. >Requires: foo = 1.5 Kernel modules without the userland part is useless in most cases. There are rare packages when kernel modules don't need a part in userland, but we require it anyway -- the license, docs, udev configuration and such stuff needs to be placed somewhere in any case and a userland package probably is the best place. >BuildRequires: kernel-devel-i686 = 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4 Needed for building the kernel-module >%defattr(644,root,root,755) Kernel modules shall not be executable -- but they need to be after %install to allow /usr/lib/rpm/find-debuginfo.sh to strip them. >/lib/modules/2.6.14-1.1776_FC4/extra/foo/ Separate location -- don't mess up with the rest of the kernel. "extra" was picked because of upstream kernel documentation. Only kernel modules in that dir are allowed -- nothing else, because otherwise they might conflict between different versions! ---------- The kernel module specfile itself looks like this: {{{ %define kmod_name foo %{!?kver: %global kver %(uname -r | sed 's/\(smp\|xen-hypervisor\| xen-guest%{?variant:\|%{variant}}\)//')} Name: %{kmod_name}-kmod Summary: %{kmod_name} kernel modules Version: 1.5 Release: 1.%(echo %{kver} | tr - _ ) URL: http://foo.sourceforge.net Source0: http://dl.sf.net/foo/foo-%{version}.tar.gz License: GPL Group: System Environment/Kernel BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) ExclusiveArch: i586 i686 x86_64 ppc ppc64 %description This package provides %{kmod_name} kernel modules. %if 0%{?variant:1} %if "%{variant}" == "up" %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %else %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %{variant} %endif %else %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %ifnarch i586 %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} smp %endif %ifnarch i586 x86_64 ppc ppc64 %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-guest %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-hypervisor %endif %endif %prep %setup -q -T -c kmod_prep() { mkdir ${1} ; tar -C ${1} -xzf %{SOURCE0} pushd ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} # fix/patch foo popd } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_prep %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_prep up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_prep smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_prep xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_prep xen-hypervisor} %endif %build kmod_build() { kvar=${1#up} make %{?_smp_mflags} -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} \ KSRC="%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kver}${kvar}-%{_target_cpu}" \ KVERS=%{kver} } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_build %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} %endif %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT kmod_install() { kvar=${1#up} make -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} install \ INST_DIR= $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name} # Temporarily executable for stripping, fixed later in %%files. chmod u+x $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name}/* } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_install %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_install up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_install smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_install xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_install xen-hypervisor} %endif %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %changelog }}} So how does it work? let's go through important parts to describe that: >%define kmod_name foo The name of the belonging userland package/the original name of the software. It is used in several places, therefore we define a macro for it. >%{!?kver: %global kver %(uname -r | sed 's/\(smp\|xen-hypervisor\| xen-guest%{?variant:\|%{variant}}\)//')} The version of the kernel is also used in several places. The version is normally passed by the buildsys to rpmbuild via '--define kver 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4' -- if not assume the current kernel, but strip of name variant name (smp,...), including the possibly user passed %{variant}. >Name: %{kmod_name}-kmod This is only the name for the SRPM -- the kernel module package itself is named the other way around, e.g. "Name: kmod-%{kmod_name}" (see the rpm macro). This might be a bit confusing in the beginning, but solves some problems nicely. >Version: 1.5 This needs to be the same as in the userland package. >Release: 3.%(echo %{kver} | tr - _ ) This results in 3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4 (e.g. the whole src.rpm is named "foo-kmod-1.5-3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4" (or something like that). The kver needs to be in the release to get proper debuginfo packages later. With this scheme we of course get a SRPM for each kernel we build the modules for. Therefore it might be better to create a stripped down tarball of the original source (e.g. remove the userland parts) to avoid wasting a lot of disk space. This is one of the drawbacks in this scheme, but it works. >ExclusiveArch: i586 i686 x86_64 ppc ppc64 This one is important for the buildsys. i386 should never be in the list because there is no i386 kernel in Fedora -- the buildsys would not find the BuildRequire and fail at that point. If a kernel module is only of interest for some of those archs of course feel free to list only those. >%if 0%{?variant:1} > %if "%{variant}" == "up" > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} > %else > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %{variant} > %endif >%else > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} > %ifnarch i586 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} smp > %endif > %ifnarch i586 x86_64 ppc ppc64 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-guest > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-hypervisor > %endif >%endif Here the rpm macro from above does it work -- for example the "%kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver}" expands to the part we have shown above. This might look a bit complicated on a first sight. Here are the details: >%if 0%{?variant:1} is needed to allow passing a one variant as build time parameter -- for example: "rpmbuild -ba SPECS/foo.spec --define 'kver 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4' --define 'variant smp'" will then only build the module for the smp variant of 2.6.14-1.1776_FC4. Note that arbitrary variants can be passed in for eg. custom kernels and things will just work, provided that the custom kernel is compatibly packaged with the FC kernel. But normally the srpm will rebuild for all known variants: > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} > %ifnarch i586 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} smp > %endif > %ifnarch i586 x86_64 ppc ppc64 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-guest > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-hypervisor > %endif This part probably often needs to be modified a bit -- for example if the module is not smp-safe one would remove this: > %ifnarch i586 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} smp > %endif Or if xen is not of interest remove this: > %ifnarch i586 x86_64 ppc ppc64 > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-guest > %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-hypervisor > %endif This scheme has also a drawback: If for example the xen-* kernels and the up/smp-kernels are not in sync (as currently in rawhide:kernel-xen-{hypervisor,guest} are at 2.6.14-1.21_FC5 and kernel{,smp} at 2.6.14-1.1783_FC5) it won't work. But that hopefully will be fixed before FC5 and can be worked around in Extras-CVS, too. >%prep >%setup -q -T -c Don't extract sources, just create a subdir for build >kmod_prep() >{ > mkdir ${1} ; tar -C ${1} -xzf %{SOURCE0} > pushd ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} > # fix/patch foo > popd >} A bash function that will extract and patch the sources that is called multiple times by the next part. >%if 0%{?variant:1} > kmod_prep %{variant} User passed a variant -- only extract it. >%else > %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_prep up} > %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_prep smp} > %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_prep xen-guest} > %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_prep xen-hypervisor} >%endif Do stuff for all variants in case they are defined (similar things are in %build in %install, too) -- If you are wondering where those kmod_build_{up,smp,xen-guest,xen-hypervisor} come from: They are defines by the kmod_package macro. >%build >kmod_build() >{ > kvar=${1#up} > make %{?_smp_mflags} -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} \ > KSRC="%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kver}${kvar}-%{_target_cpu}" \ > KVERS=%{kver} >} Build the module -- this or similar commands should work with most modern kernel modules. >%install >rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT >kmod_install() >{ > kvar=${1#up} > make -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} install \ > INST_DIR= $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name} > # Temporarily executable for stripping, fixed later in %%files. > chmod u+x $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name}/* >} Install the module and mark it executable for stripping. ---------- Mini-FAQ: Will there be further enhancements for the kernel module proposal? Probably yes. We probably didn't consider every possible scenario out there. But the general scheme/direction probably will stay. Will other repos use the same scheme? You have to ask those repos, but some people from a major 3rd party repo that enhances core and extras indicated that they want to use the same standard. Does it work with yum? Not perfectly (yet). We need a plugin for yum that will handles some special cases for kernel module packages. There are no concrete plans who works on that ATM. Are you interested to help? Does it work in the Extras Buildsys? Not perfectly (yet). We need a plugin or enhancement that will search for the latest kernel version and then will pass this to the rpmbuild command with "--define 'kver foo'". There are no concrete plans who works on that ATM. Are you interested to help? Will this proposal be used for the GFS stuff in Fedora Core, too? Probably. Is it possible to compile against self compiled kernels? Yes, if self compiled means "packaged in a manner compatible with FC kernels". Otherwise: no. Well, it's _possible_, but not supported nor documented. Just create a FC compatible kernel package of your custom kernel, and compile the module packages for it by passing --define 'variant foo' to rpmbuild. This standard is stupid. Maybe. Post a better one (FYI: some older ones are in the history of the wiki). And do it quickly, be concise, strictly to the point, and convince us why it is better. ---------- Find attached a template for a kernel-module package. Two real-life examples can be found at: Lirc; Userland (in addition to the lirc package in cvs; note this practically results in three SRPMS for lirc -- the lirc-kmod-common part was split out for other maintaining reasons, normally it should be a subpackage of the normal lirc package) http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-common-0.8.0-2.src.rpm Kernel-Module: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.6.pre3.2.6.15_1.1819_FC5.src.rpm Thinkpad; Useland: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-common-5.8-5.src.rpm Kernel-Module: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-6.2.6.15_1.1819_FC5.src.rpm I also have updated openafs packages on my harddisk based on the SRPMS from Matthew Miller. But they are untested ATM and not 100% up2date to the lastest proposal (there were some last minute changes). Okay, let the flamewar ^w discussion begin! CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- next part -------------- %define kmod_name foo %{!?kver: %global kver %(uname -r | sed 's/\(smp\|xen-hypervisor\|xen-guest%{?variant:\|%{variant}}\)//')} # this block will be added to the rpm macros in core # usage: %kmod_package $kmod_name $kver $kvariant(optional, empty for UP) # defines: %{kmod_build_($kvariant|up)} %define kmod_package() \ %{expand: %%global kmod_build_%{?3}%{!?3:up} 1} \ %package -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ Summary: %{1} kernel module \ Group: System Environment/Kernel \ Provides: kernel-module = %{2}%{?3} \ %{?3:Provides: kmod-%{1} = %{version}-%{release}} \ Requires: kernel-%{_target_cpu} = %{2}%{?3} \ Requires: %{1}-kmod-common = %{version} \ Requires(post): /sbin/depmod \ Requires(postun): /sbin/depmod \ BuildRequires: kernel-devel-%{_target_cpu} = %{2}%{?3} \ %description -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ This package provides the %{1} kernel modules built for the Linux \ kernel %{2}%{?3} for the %{_target_cpu} family of processors. \ %post -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ /sbin/depmod -aeF /boot/System.map-%{2}%{?3} %{2}%{?3} > /dev/null || : \ %postun -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ /sbin/depmod -aF /boot/System.map-%{2}%{?3} %{2}%{?3} &> /dev/null || : \ %files -n kmod-%{1}%{?3:-%3} \ %defattr(644,root,root,755) \ /lib/modules/%{2}%{?3}/extra/%{1}/ \ %{nil} Name: %{kmod_name}-kmod Summary: %{kmod_name} kernel modules Version: 1.5 Release: 3.%(echo %{kver} | tr - _ ) URL: http://foo.sourceforge.net Source0: http://dl.sf.net/foo/foo-%{version}.tar.gz License: GPL Group: System Environment/Kernel BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) ExclusiveArch: i586 i686 x86_64 ppc ppc64 %description This package provides %{kmod_name} kernel modules. %if 0%{?variant:1} %if "%{variant}" == "up" %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %else %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %{variant} %endif %else %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} %ifnarch i586 %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} smp %endif %ifnarch i586 x86_64 ppc ppc64 %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-guest %kmod_package %{kmod_name} %{kver} xen-hypervisor %endif %endif %prep %setup -q -T -c kmod_prep() { mkdir ${1} ; tar -C ${1} -xzf %{SOURCE0} pushd ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} # fix/patch foo popd } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_prep %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_prep up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_prep smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_prep xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_prep xen-hypervisor} %endif %build kmod_build() { kvar=${1#up} make %{?_smp_mflags} -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} \ KSRC="%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kver}${kvar}-%{_target_cpu}" \ KVERS=%{kver} } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_build %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} %endif %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT kmod_install() { kvar=${1#up} make -C ${1}/%{kmod_name}-%{version} install \ INST_DIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name} # Temporarily executable for stripping, fixed later in %%files. chmod u+x $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/%{kver}${kvar}/extra/%{kmod_name}/* } %if 0%{?variant:1} kmod_install %{variant} %else %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_install up} %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_install smp} %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_install xen-guest} %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_install xen-hypervisor} %endif %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %changelog From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 10:37:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 05:37:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061037.k06Abefc029453@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 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 2006-01-06 05:37 EST ------- I've been playing with wine today (using winehq RPMS, building i386 cvs on x86_64 is a pain) and encountered the following bug, which is really a show stopper for wine on devel: bug 177097 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 6 10:49:42 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:49:42 +0200 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136542297.5382.303.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136541212.31699.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136542297.5382.303.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136544582.31699.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:11 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > => FESCO is in error of making this decision mandatory. >From the guidelines: "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." From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 10:47:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 05:47:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061047.k06AlG8n031432@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-06 05:47 EST ------- NEEDSWORK: 1. Missing BuildRequires: perl(Module::Build) >= 0.2611 2. shipping *.bs 3. Redundant CFLAGS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 6 10:57:01 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:57:01 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <1136544582.31699.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136541212.31699.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136542297.5382.303.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136544582.31699.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136545021.5382.312.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 12:49 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:11 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > => FESCO is in error of making this decision mandatory. > > >From the guidelines: "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." The point is: This exception is the general case. The case of depending on directories from "filesystem" is a special case. So, disallowing packages to own directories from "filesystem" is useful, all of the rest is non-sense and semi-functional work-arounds to bugs in rpm. Ralf From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Fri Jan 6 11:02:18 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:02:18 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> (Michael Schwendt's message of "Fri, 6 Jan 2006 01:28:09 +0100") References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <87zmm94o1x.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) writes: >> The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory >> structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one >> (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, >> and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, >> as they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, >> though. > > The order, in which the two are installed, is irrelevant. I am not sure whether your statement is related to the cited paragraph. But generally, the order of package installation IS relevant regarding directory ownership. E.g. let's have two packages A and B with A | /etc/init.d/foo (file) B | /etc/init.d/ -> rc.d/init.d (symlink) | /etc/rc.d/init.d/ (directory) Then, you have to make sure that 'B' is installed, before 'A' places its files. Else, you will end with two distinct initrd directories. Enrico From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 6 11:09:06 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:09:06 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > If a kernel module is only of interest for some of those archs of > course feel free to list only those. I'd still like to see a policy of having to have a bug filed for any arch exclusion -- and not just for kernel modules. Even if it's a long-term reason like 'lilo doesn't make sense on ppc'. > %if 0%{?variant:1} > kmod_build %{variant} > %else > %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} > %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} > %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} > %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} > %endif What if you want to build for, for example, up, smp and hugemem kernels? Do you have to build the same RPM twice? I'd like to see the handling of available variants get a little more cunning. The packager shouldn't need to know which variants are available -- she should be able to just say 'all' or 'all except XXX' (or of course 'just XXX' although I disapprove of your stated example of broken-on-SMP code. We don't package crap code, surely?). Couldn't we make the variant list available somehow? Each kernel-devel package could include a text file telling the variants which are available for that architecture in that build, perhaps? Also, we don't seem to handle modules which export symbols. For those, we need to create the appropriate additions to the Module.symvers file. That shouldn't be particularly hard -- we can move that file from its current location in the kernel-source package to a 'symvers' directory somewhere, and each module which exports symbols can add a file to that directory then have a %post script which adds them all back together again. -- dwmw2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 11:08:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:08:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061108.k06B8BBd002844@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-06 06:07 EST ------- Since this package has been APPROVED, and built, it should be CLOSED NEXTRELEASE and the blocker bug should be switched to FE-ACCEPT. All further bugs should be filed under the "wine" component in Fedora 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 Fri Jan 6 11:19:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:19:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061119.k06BJv0i005064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-06 06:19 EST ------- Until devel is resolved I want to keep this open ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 11:24:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:24:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061124.k06BOumL006326@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-06 06:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #119) > Until devel is resolved I want to keep this open ... Fair enough, I was more concerned about other non-devel (such as on FC3 and FC4) related wine issues that people may continue to post to this bug. At least the bug blocker should be switched from FE-REVIEW to FE-ACCEPT because the package has been APPROVED, even if devel hasn't been built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 11:38:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:38:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061138.k06BcKov008378@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-06 06:38 EST ------- rpmlint output: RPMS/nagios-1.3-7.i386.rpm: E: nagios non-standard-uid /var/log/nagios/archives nagios E: nagios non-standard-gid /var/log/nagios/archives nagios E: nagios non-readable /etc/nagios/private/resource.cfg-sample 0640 E: nagios non-standard-uid /var/spool/nagios nagios E: nagios non-standard-gid /var/spool/nagios nagios E: nagios non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/nagios 02775 E: nagios non-standard-uid /var/log/nagios nagios E: nagios non-standard-gid /var/log/nagios nagios E: nagios non-standard-dir-perm /etc/nagios/private 0750 - All ignorable E: nagios subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/nagios - Bogus, since the initscript does touch /var/lock/subsys/nagios RPMS/nagios-debuginfo-1.3-7.i386.rpm: RPMS/nagios-devel-1.3-7.i386.rpm: W: nagios-devel no-documentation - Ignorable; there isn't anything appropriate for it SRPMS/nagios-1.3-7.src.rpm: E: nagios configure-without-libdir-spec - Ignorable, since the default as per configure --help is fine - Spec looks reasonable - File matches upstream - Builds under mock in FC4 - The rest looks good 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi Fri Jan 6 11:43:30 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 13:43:30 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1136547810.31699.34.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:09 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > %if 0%{?variant:1} > > kmod_build %{variant} > > %else > > %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} > > %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} > > %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} > > %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} > > %endif > > What if you want to build for, for example, up, smp and hugemem kernels? > Do you have to build the same RPM twice? Actually, if you want to build _exactly_ for those three, you'd need to rebuild it three times (once for each like --define 'variant foo'), or modify the specfile, removing xen-* and adding hugemem. > I'd like to see the handling of > available variants get a little more cunning. The packager shouldn't > need to know which variants are available Very much agreed (and ditto for archs!), but no good solution has been found so far, and IMNSHO this is not something that should block starting shipping modules in Extras. It's an implementation detail which can be improved later if someone comes up with a good solution. > Couldn't we make the variant list available somehow? Each kernel-devel > package could include a text file telling the variants which are > available for that architecture in that build, perhaps? I'm not sure how such a text file could be used. Lack of looping constructs in specfiles doesn't help :( From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 11:39:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:39:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061139.k06BdnZj008612@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-06 06:39 EST ------- Ok. Now it's been a month since the incident where I thought the package was reviewed but it wasn't. It seems that Aurelien left the ship and I get no answers about what happens to the review. Should I assume that Fedora has dropped this project completely? And if not, what more needs to be done? If the problem is that I did wrong, should someone else take over this rpm 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 11:49:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:49:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061149.k06BnKug010428@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-06 06:48 EST ------- there are still bugs remaining that break existing setups [1] ... we need to get them fixed first 1: like the selinux one x86_64 shutdown? (for me it hangs) see comment #131 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 11:59:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 06:59:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061159.k06Bx29t012185@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-06 06:58 EST ------- Ps its worth mentioning that even for a small and not so exciting package the first package review takes some time.. There is a limited list of people who can do the initial sponsorship, and its unfortunatly 'normal' that this takes quite a bit of time. With more complex packages like this one, the process can go even slower. Its not only a simple package review but also involves judgement of when its ready for 'prime time' in fedora extra's, Which is a decission which can be sped up by making sure the issues reported here are looked at and preferably solved to ensure when its in extra's it will work correctly, and to be responsive in this bug report (which by all apearances you are!) I'm afraid i'm not on the list of initial sponsors so i can only make some general comments, but i'll happily will test and try the initng package again to atleast leave some feedback on its functioning! Don't get discouraged, a new boot manager is a big deal and will take some time but i'm sure its definatly not ignored! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 6 12:03:01 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:03:01 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136547810.31699.34.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136547810.31699.34.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136548981.4158.272.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 13:43 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:09 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > %if 0%{?variant:1} > > > kmod_build %{variant} > > > %else > > > %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} > > > %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} > > > %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} > > > %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} > > > %endif > > > > What if you want to build for, for example, up, smp and hugemem kernels? > > Do you have to build the same RPM twice? > > Actually, if you want to build _exactly_ for those three, you'd need to > rebuild it three times (once for each like --define 'variant foo'), or > modify the specfile, removing xen-* and adding hugemem. I thought I could do one pass to build for both up and smp, then another to build the hugemem variant? > > I'd like to see the handling of > > available variants get a little more cunning. The packager shouldn't > > need to know which variants are available > > Very much agreed (and ditto for archs!), but no good solution has been > found so far, and IMNSHO this is not something that should block > starting shipping modules in Extras. It's an implementation detail > which can be improved later if someone comes up with a good solution. > > > Couldn't we make the variant list available somehow? Each kernel-devel > > package could include a text file telling the variants which are > > available for that architecture in that build, perhaps? > > I'm not sure how such a text file could be used. Lack of looping > constructs in specfiles doesn't help :( Oh, you can do looping constructs in specfiles. It's just not _pretty_. I did it once, addressing precisely this problem. I can't remember how, but I think I'm happier that way. What chance of extending rpm with a '%foreach'? Another thing which would be nice to have is a buildsystem-trigger which automatically rebuilds the kmod package(s) when a new kernel becomes available. And do we actually have machines building ppc64 for Extras yet? You don't need actual ppc64 hardware -- the ppc32 compiler is perfectly capable of generating ppc64 output (for kernel modules and anything else that isn't autocrap-damaged, at least). -- dwmw2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 12:00:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:00:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061200.k06C0rOM012351@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-06 07:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #151) > there are still bugs remaining that break existing setups [1] ... > we need to get them fixed first > 1: like the selinux one Darn. I thought we fixed that one with the work in initng bz 365. What is it that doesn't work now? > x86_64 shutdown? (for me it hangs) see comment #131 Hmmmm... I guess we need more information on this one as well. It seems to me hald is the problem. Does starting/stopping hald manually (using ngc) work? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 12:06:58 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 13:06:58 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1136549218.3146.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:09 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > If a kernel module is only of interest for some of those archs of > > course feel free to list only those. > > I'd still like to see a policy of having to have a bug filed for any > arch exclusion -- and not just for kernel modules. We have such a one already, that of course also applies to kernel modules: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines - 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. > Even if it's a > long-term reason like 'lilo doesn't make sense on ppc'. Well, I don't think it's is necessary in this example because it's unlikely that it will change. But if others agree on this we can even try to enforce the rule in such situations (but I would create a separate bug-account for this -- I don't want to see all those bugs that probably never get fixed). CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 12:09:04 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 13:09:04 +0100 Subject: Now in the wiki, too (was: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras) In-Reply-To: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136549344.3146.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:30 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > Hi all! > > After looking at several kernel module proposals in the wiki and long > discussions on mailing lists and during IRC meetings the Fedora Extras > Steering Committee (also known as FESCo) agreed on a standard for > packaging kernel modules in Fedora Extras. Find the details below for > a last discussion on this mailing list before this proposal is being > used. [...] Now available in the wiki, too: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/KernelModuleProposal -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 12:07:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:07:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061207.k06C7f7C013059@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-06 07:07 EST ------- STOP STOP STOP... there is still no rational for usage of '/var/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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 12:08:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:08:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061208.k06C8EYt013179@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-06 07:08 EST ------- (In reply to comment #152) > ...not so exciting package... But it is! > Don't get discouraged, a new boot manager is a big deal and will take some time > but i'm sure its definatly not ignored! Thanks. I guess it's just me being impatient. I've been working on this package for about half a year now, and I still haven't got a clear picture of what needs to be done before it's really good... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:12:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:12:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061212.k06CCbQ4013653@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163779 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-06 07:12 EST ------- You're right, my bad. Further review required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:14:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:14:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061214.k06CExLD014034@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-06 07:14 EST ------- The invalid-soname error means that the library's run-time name (aka the shared object's run-time name) encoded within the library binary is incomplete or doesn't match the versions in the file name. See e.g. $ readelf -d libupnp.so.1.2.1 | grep SONAME 0x0000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libupnp.so] This is immature library versioning. For libixml.so and libthreadutil.so, the authors don't encode any version in the library at all. For libupnp, which has versions in its file name, the soname ought to be "libupnp.so.1". Even if the library API is not planned to change in the near future, the authors ought to use version 1. If the API is not considered stable yet, they ought not use versions 1.2.1 in the library file name when they don't adjust the soname accordingly. They pretend that multiple files with different names can coexist, while in fact the run-time name of the library is non-versioned. [...] A few other problems with the package: * doesn't build with default RPM opt flags * must not strip the libraries, since that disables the debuginfo package * due to the soname problem, ldconfig creates an unowned link libupnp.so to the versioned library - this makes the version completely useless! * -devel subpackage is missing /usr/include/upnp directory * -devel subpackage ought to require full version-release of main package to stay in sync with the main package always (think about patches applied in updates, notes in %changelog, fixed run-time/link-time problems, e.g.) * much better Summary: Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) SDK * prefer 'install -p' to preserve timestamps -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:21:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:21:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061221.k06CLB9u014824@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-06 07:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #154) > > ...not so exciting package... > But it is! I meant to say that even for a non-exciting package it takes a lot of time, so for an exciting package like this one its normal it takes even a little more time before someone will stamp it 'Ok ready for prime time now!'; I didn't mean to insinuate it was not exciting at 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 12:25:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:25:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061225.k06CPFQ9015581@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-06 07:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #153) > (In reply to comment #151) > > there are still bugs remaining that break existing setups [1] ... > > we need to get them fixed first > > 1: like the selinux one > > Darn. I thought we fixed that one with the work in initng bz 365. What is it > that doesn't work now? > > > x86_64 shutdown? (for me it hangs) see comment #131 > > Hmmmm... I guess we need more information on this one as well. It seems to me > hald is the problem. Does starting/stopping hald manually (using ngc) work? we need a patch that loads the policy ... or is it already included? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:32:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:32:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177104] New: Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt 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=177104 Summary: Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/abook.spec SRPM: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/abook-0.5.5-1.src.rpm Description: Abook is a small and powerful text-based addressbook program designed for use with the mutt mail client. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:41:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:41:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175898] Review Request: perl-Text-CSV_XS - Comma-separated values manipulation routines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061241.k06Cf7fT017733@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-CSV_XS - Comma-separated values manipulation routines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175898 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-06 07:40 EST ------- Paul, * RPM_OPT_FLAGS: specfile updated (and my specfile generator script). * Imported and build for FC-4 and devel. Thanks, jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:41:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:41:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175899] Review Request: perl-DBD-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061241.k06Cf8dp017755@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175899 Bug 175899 depends on bug 175898, which changed state. Bug 175898 Summary: Review Request: perl-Text-CSV_XS - Comma-separated values manipulation routines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175898 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 Fri Jan 6 12:45:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:45:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] New: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program 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=177105 Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/gnomeradio.spec SRPM: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/gnomeradio-1.6-2.src.rpm Description: A FM-Tuner program for GNOME. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:45:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:45:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061245.k06CjmdG018781@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 gauret at free.fr 2006-01-06 07:45 EST ------- Don't be hasty, master Daniel. I did not leave the ship, I just had other things to do first. You're already sponsored, so we now "just" have to make sure initng can be a full init replacement for Fedora. That takes time, SELinux and x86_64 must work before this package is approved. This bug is not even 2 months old, it's pretty young for such a package. A "heads up" post can be useful sometimes, but don't think everybody lost interest in initng because they were busy playing with their new Christmas toys :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 12:51:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:51:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177106] New: Review Request: libgdgeda 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=177106 Summary: Review Request: libgdgeda Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/libgdgeda.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/libgdgeda-2.0.15-3.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a library used by gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. The library provides png export for libgeda. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 6 12:55:39 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:55:39 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136549218.3146.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136549218.3146.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136552139.4158.275.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 13:06 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Well, I don't think it's is necessary in this example because it's > unlikely that it will change. But if others agree on this we can even > try to enforce the rule in such situations (but I would create a > separate bug-account for this -- I don't want to see all those bugs > that probably never get fixed). Yeah, the idea behind requiring it in all cases was that it could then be enforced. It's probably OK for the bug to be a CLOSED bug. -- dwmw2 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Jan 6 12:59:39 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:59:39 +0100 Subject: Packaging/Review Guidelines change In-Reply-To: <87zmm94o1x.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> References: <1136488651.2369.146.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43BD7BC0.2090601@laposte.net> <1136493731.2369.156.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106012809.17cb97e3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <87zmm94o1x.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Message-ID: <20060106135939.639fc0eb.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:02:18 +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote: > bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) writes: > > >> The only exception case is where two packages use the same directory > >> structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the other one > >> (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the other). Then, > >> and only then, its acceptable for both packages to own the directory, > >> as they both have the potential to be "first". This is a corner case, > >> though. > > > > The order, in which the two are installed, is irrelevant. > > I am not sure whether your statement is related to the cited paragraph. But > generally, the order of package installation IS relevant regarding directory > ownership. > > E.g. let's have two packages A and B with > > A > | /etc/init.d/foo (file) > > B > | /etc/init.d/ -> rc.d/init.d (symlink) > | /etc/rc.d/init.d/ (directory) > > > Then, you have to make sure that 'B' is installed, before 'A' places its > files. Else, you will end with two distinct initrd directories. That is a special case, where a real dependency exists. 'A' _requires_ (!) the filesystem structure provided by 'B'. That is a race between a symlink and a directory and not just the problem of an "unowned directory". On the contrary, the common case of "unowned directories" is when 'A' stores optional (!) files in a directory and 'B' also stores files in that directory. Both don't need these files at run-time, because else they would be broken (restrictive umask at install-time leading to inaccessible directories and so on -- if they needed access to the files, directory and file ownership and access privileges _must_ be complete). But another package, 'C', may complete the filesystem structure and provide means to access the optional files contained within 'A' and 'B'. E.g. a help system browser. That is a common case where packagers tend towards owning every directory, even if it leads to ugly things like sharing directory ownership between multiple packages. And then the fun starts, when rpm -qf reports that multiple packages own directories like /usr/share/aclocal, and one of them can mess up the access privileges by accident. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 12:55:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 07:55:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177107] New: Review Request: libgeda - library for gEDA circuit design software 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=177107 Summary: Review Request: libgeda - library for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/libgeda.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/libgeda-20050820.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a library used by gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. The library provides utility functions for other software of gEDA. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 13:02:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177108] New: Review Request: libgeda - schematic editor for gEDA circuit design software 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=177108 Summary: Review Request: libgeda - schematic editor for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-symbols.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-symbols-20050820.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a schematic editor for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. The software allows to create and edit schematic circuit diagrams. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 13:05:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:05:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177108] Review Request: geda-gschem - schematic editor for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061305.k06D5w0T021548@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From wk at ire.pw.edu.pl 2006-01-06 08:05 EST ------- Oops, the URL should be: Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-gschem.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-gschem-20050820.fc4.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 Fri Jan 6 13:08:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:08:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177109] New: Review Request: geda-sybols - symbol repository for gEDA circuit design software 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=177109 Summary: Review Request: geda-sybols - symbol repository for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-symbols.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-symbols-20050820.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a symbol repository for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It contains graphical symbols that are placed on schematic circuit diagrams. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 13:12:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:12:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177110] New: Review Request: geda-gsymcheck - symbol checker for gEDA circuit design software 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=177110 Summary: Review Request: geda-gsymcheck - symbol checker for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-gsymcheck.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-symcheck-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a symbol checker for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It allows to chech the correstness of symbols used for drawing schematic. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 13:47:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:47:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177113] New: Review Request: geda-netlist - netlist generator for gEDA circuit design software 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=177113 Summary: Review Request: geda-netlist - netlist generator for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-gnetlist.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-gnetlist-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a netlist generator for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It to generate circuit netlists in various formats and also for cheking corectness of the circuit. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 13:51:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:51:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165878] Review Request: kadu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061351.k06Dp4vl028264@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kadu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165878 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-06 08:50 EST ------- Kadu 0.4.3 has been released some time ago. Mariusz do you still work on 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 Fri Jan 6 13:51:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:51:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177115] New: Review Request: geda-utils - utilities for gEDA circuit design software 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=177115 Summary: Review Request: geda-utils - utilities for gEDA circuit design software Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-utils.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-utils-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a collection of utility software for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It contains several utility programs as file format converters. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 6 14:04:00 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:04:00 -0500 Subject: owners owners.list,1.500,1.501 In-Reply-To: <200601061357.k06Dv3B8007255@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601061357.k06Dv3B8007255@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1136556240.11940.0.camel@ignacio.lan> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 08:56 -0500, Matthias Haase wrote: > Author: endur > > Update of /cvs/extras/owners > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7214 > > Modified Files: > owners.list > @@ -1339,3 +1339,4 @@ > Fedora Extras|zope|Application server in Python|gauret at free.fr|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|zziplib|Lightweight library to easily extract data from zip files|matthias at rpmforge.net|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|buoh|Online comics reader|chabotc at xs4all.nl|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > +Fedora Extras|streamtuner|A stream directory browser|endur at bennewitz.com|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| WHAT exactly is so difficult about keeping this file in alpha order? -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From chabotc at xs4all.nl Fri Jan 6 14:16:06 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 15:16:06 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.500,1.501 In-Reply-To: <1136556240.11940.0.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <200601061357.k06Dv3B8007255@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1136556240.11940.0.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1136556966.2240.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Ummm well as one being guilty of the same crime (as you can see in the change below) i can tell you that there is one thing that made it difficult for me: No one mentioned that it should be in alphabetical order! Nor is it in the comments inside the file.. Its only after doing a cvs commit that i realized the current packages listed in the owners list showed every sign of being sorted by name, but i didn't know if it was worth creating more cvs commit spam to rectify the situation.. Maybe worth putting a notice in the owners file and/or in the NewPackageProcess wiki page about the alphabetical order thing? Would help keep new contributers from having to undergo this embarrassment :-) -- Chris Chabot On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:04 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 08:56 -0500, Matthias Haase wrote: > > Author: endur > > > > Update of /cvs/extras/owners > > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7214 > > > > Modified Files: > > owners.list > > > @@ -1339,3 +1339,4 @@ > > Fedora Extras|zope|Application server in Python|gauret at free.fr|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > > Fedora Extras|zziplib|Lightweight library to easily extract data from zip files|matthias at rpmforge.net|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > > Fedora Extras|buoh|Online comics reader|chabotc at xs4all.nl|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > > +Fedora Extras|streamtuner|A stream directory browser|endur at bennewitz.com|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > > WHAT exactly is so difficult about keeping this file in alpha order? > -------------- 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 Jan 6 14:25:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:25:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177117] New: Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client 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=177117 Summary: Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libtlen.spec SRPM: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libtlen-0-0.1.20041113.src.rpm Description: libtlen is a library providing an API for client programs which want to use Tlen.pl, an Instant Messanging protocol based on Jabber, but with some modifications. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 14:41:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:41:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173927] Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061441.k06Ef2BD003417@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173927 dennis at ausil.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |dennis at ausil.us OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-06 09:40 EST ------- Ok based on my previous review If you remove the empty NEWS file and since no one has said the sonames are an issue 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 Jan 6 14:43:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:43:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173927] Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061443.k06EhGMl004039@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173927 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-06 09:43 EST ------- OK, NEWS is history. 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 Fri Jan 6 14:53:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:53:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173927] Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061453.k06Er9o7005564@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173927 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-06 09:52 EST ------- imported. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 14:53:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:53:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176288] Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061453.k06ErgFd005672@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176288 Bug 176288 depends on bug 173927, which changed state. Bug 173927 Summary: Review Request: akode: Audio-decoding framewor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173927 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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Fri Jan 6 15:05:06 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:35:06 +0330 Subject: owners owners.list,1.500,1.501 In-Reply-To: <1136556966.2240.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200601061357.k06Dv3B8007255@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1136556240.11940.0.camel@ignacio.lan> <1136556966.2240.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136559906.3030.12.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 15:16 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > No one mentioned that it should be in alphabetical order! Well, it's at least here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines#head-281b66f40cee52974db2a1450fa2f3e5b4016dd8 (item 6) > Nor is it in the comments inside the file.. I just added a comment there. > Maybe worth putting a notice [...] in the > NewPackageProcess wiki page about the alphabetical order thing? Done. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 15:04:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:04:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061504.k06F4Pip007439@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-06 10:04 EST ------- comment #146: yes the pppoe detection works properly now on x86_64 rawhide (and i guess anywhere else) since 0.5.1 is coming pretty soon and somehow svn doesent work cause i cant mount rootfs (guess another lvm issue) other than that i think aswell there is good progress beeing 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 Fri Jan 6 15:13:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:13:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177037] Review Request: perl-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061513.k06FDp8I008864@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177037 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-06 10:13 EST ------- Patch applied to -2: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Clone-0.18-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-Clone.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 Fri Jan 6 15:15:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061515.k06FFATa009085@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-06 10:15 EST ------- Fixed in -2: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version-0.50-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version.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 Fri Jan 6 15:23:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:23:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061523.k06FN7eo010785@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-06 10:23 EST ------- - Manpages converted - Dropped test suite - Sorry, I relied on mfr's page, saw xml.sax in parser.py, and didn't realize that was in python pkg; removed - Requires: docbook-style-xsl (yes, it's needed) takes care of openjade (sgmlnorm); also added Requires: libxslt (xsltproc) Thanks for checking this further. Since I do a lot of docs work and have the "A&P" buildgroup installed, my testing was flawed. New versions available: SPEC: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff.spec SRPM: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff-0.6.7-2.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 Fri Jan 6 15:25:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:25:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061525.k06FP9Fg011246@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-06 10:24 EST ------- By the way, version 0.51 is out (trivial update). Diff from version-0.50 to version-0.51 http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=version-0.50&to=version-0.51 Another suggestion: Tag the pod file listed in %files section as documentation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 15:32:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:32:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061532.k06FWNT6012601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-06 10:32 EST ------- Bump to 0.51, tag the pod file as doc: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version-0.51-1.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version.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 Fri Jan 6 15:34:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:34:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061534.k06FYfpa013109@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-06 10:34 EST ------- I've moved everything that was in %{_localstatedir}/{%_lib} to %{_libdir}. I should have done that earlier. SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-8.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 jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu Fri Jan 6 15:55:42 2006 From: jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu (Jack Neely) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:55:42 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Folks, Glad to see that somebody has been spending some time on this. I've been very concerned about the complexity that the packager has to work with. That seems a big focus in this spec file template and I think that the usability of the template is pretty good compared to some of the other spec files I've tried to work with. I would encurage more comments in the template to identify the parts that the packager would focus on. Also, the trade offs made are very sane. The only kernel module I really care about is OpenAFS which will not build with the provided make commands. However, I don't think that is a big problem. I'll spend some time with this template and OpenAFS, but its not something I can complete today. Matt, thoughts? Nice job folks. Jack Neely -- Jack Neely Campus Linux Services Project Lead PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 15:59:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:59:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177037] Review Request: perl-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061559.k06FxDmt018913@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Clone : Recursively copy perl datatypes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177037 rc040203 at freenet.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-06 10:59 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 dcbw at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 16:12:42 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:12:42 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi all! > > After looking at several kernel module proposals in the wiki and long > discussions on mailing lists and during IRC meetings the Fedora Extras > Steering Committee (also known as FESCo) agreed on a standard for > packaging kernel modules in Fedora Extras. Find the details below for > a last discussion on this mailing list before this proposal is being > used. We can special-case kernel modules in the Extras buildsystem if we need to, and we can likely take some of the pain away by auto-building the modules when a new kernel comes out somehow. We'd then mail the submitter if the auto-build failed. It's not hard, just ugly. Where it gets more interesting is if you want to build an updated SRPM for a kernel that's not the most recent. We can also try to special-case the up/smp/hugemem thing if it's a pain to do %foreach in the specfile. We probably want to keep specfiles cleaner and move some of the complexity into the build system to keep the barrier-to-entry lower for packages themselves. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 16:10:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:10:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177134] New: Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites 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=177134 Summary: Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/mkvtoolnix.spec SRPM: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/mkvtoolnix-1.6.5-2.src.rpm Description: Mkvtoolnix is a set of utilities to mux and demux audio, video and subtitle streams into and from Matroska containers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:22:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:22:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061622.k06GMQK2023254@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From endur at bennewitz.com 2006-01-06 11:22 EST ------- > The remaining unneeded dependency on desktop-file-utils can be deleted > in CVS. Fixed in CVS. I'm currently at step 18. Branches for FC-3 and FC-4 are missing. And $ make plague fails currently with /usr/bin/plague-client build streamtuner streamtuner-0_99_99-7_fc5 devel Server returned an error: Insufficient privileges. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:28:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:28:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174275] Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061628.k06GSuXX024440@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nautilus-actions - Nautilus extension for customizing the context menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174275 dakingun at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-06 11:28 EST ------- I'd forgotten to close this, the package has already been built and released. Thanks to Jeff and Brian for the reviews. Deji -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:30:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:30:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061630.k06GUDPf024761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-06 11:30 EST ------- Also, be aware that people will run nagios-plugins using a single nagios config entry on multiple machines. So it is very important that @USER1@ will work on all architectures. This is a limitation of nagios, but the nagios-plugins should accomodate those. What I have done is: install in /usr/lib/nagios/plugins create a softlink of /var/lib/nagios to /usr/lib/nagios create a softlink of /usr/lib/nagios/plugins to /usr/lib/nagios/libexec also: {_sbindir}/useradd -d %{_datadir}/%{name} I am not sure what _datadir resolves to, but I believe either /usr/lib/ or /var/lib, which means that you've put nagios' homedir in the same place as the plugins. Since ssh checks to see if the user is owning his own homedir, this requires nagios to have read/write to the plugins directory. I think it is better to have nagios' homedir elsewhere (eg in /home/nagios), so that it can have readonly access to its plugins, while not breaking automated logins with ssh for remote plugin execution. Additionally, /home can be NFS mounted, so that the ssh key distribution works over a large set of machines without the need to manually install nagios' ssh key everywhere in /usr/lib/nagios or /var/lib/nagios (if that is not nfs mounted, since it could be that there is a mix of linux/distro/OSes around the network so that /usrlib/nagios cannot easilly be an NFS export) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:30:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:30:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177065] Ownership of texmf/doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061630.k06GUpi9024905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Ownership of texmf/doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177065 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jpo at di.uminho.pt ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-06 11:30 EST ------- (In reply to comment #0) > From Bugzilla Helper: > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.0.7-1.1.fc4 Firefox/1.0.7 > > Description of problem: > RFE to change ownership of the texmf/doc package from tetex-doc to tetex > > The issue is that Fedora Extras has changed policy such that packages are not allowed to own directories owned by other packages. > > tetex packages often put stuff into texmf/doc so that they are available to the texdoc application, which is part of the tetex package. > > Since the tetex-doc package owns texmf/doc but is rather large, and not required for texdoc to work - what we have been doing is allowing the various tetex add-on packages to own texmf/doc so that they don't result in an un-owned directory or have to require the huge tetex-doc package. > > [mpeters at prometheus ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/texmf/doc > tetex-prosper-1.5-2.fc4 > tetex-perltex-1.2-2.fc4 > tetex-fontools-20051003-1.fc4 > tetex-doc-3.0-7.FC4 > [mpeters at prometheus ~]$ > > Since texdoc is owned by the tetex package and the texmf/doc directory is a standard place for tetex packages to put stuff, the simple solution would be to change ownership of the texmf/doc to the tetex package so that the tetex add-on packages no longer need to own that directory (or require tetex-doc) > The ownership problem should also apply to every (?) texmf/doc subdirectory * /usr/share/texmf/doc/latex/ (latex packages documentation base dir) * /usr/share/texmf/doc/fonts/ (latex fonts documentation base dir) * /usr/share/texmf/doc/.../ just try a "rpm -qf /usr/share/texmf/doc/latex/" > > Additional info: > > I don't think this is worth changing for FC 3/4 unless there is something else that needs changing, as the update would cause a massive download for a fairly trivial issue. > We do have a problem with current FC-4 and FC-5 tetex configuration: there is no way to update system-wide latex core packages/fonts (the directory search order is wrong): Command: kpsewhich -expand-var '$TEXMF' FC-3: {/root/texmf,!!/usr/local/share/texmf,!!/usr/share/texmf} FC-4: {!!/root/.texmf-config,!!/root/.texmf-var,/root/texmf, \ !!/usr/share/texmf-config,!!/usr/share/texmf-var,!!/usr/share/texmf, \ !!/usr/local/share/texmf,!!/usr/share/texmf-dist} Rawhide: {!!/root/.texmf-config,!!/root/.texmf-var,/root/texmf, \ !!/usr/share/texmf-config,!!/usr/share/texmf-var,!!/usr/share/texmf, \ !!/usr/local/share/texmf,!!/usr/share/texmf-dist} In particular, the "/usr/local/share/texmf" directory should be listed before "/usr/share/texmf". Note: at least the following packages - beamer, pgf, and xcolor - have more recent versions than the ones shipped with tetex 3.0. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 16:16:31 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 17:16:31 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <1136564191.3146.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 10:55 -0500 schrieb Jack Neely: > Folks, > > Glad to see that somebody has been spending some time on this. I've > been very concerned about the complexity that the packager has to work > with. That seems a big focus in this spec file template and I think > that the usability of the template is pretty good compared to some of > the other spec files I've tried to work with. I would encurage > more comments in the template to identify the parts that the packager > would focus on. Also, the trade offs made are very sane. > > The only kernel module I really care about is OpenAFS which will not > build with the provided make commands. However, I don't think that is a > big problem. > > I'll spend some time with this template and OpenAFS, but its not > something I can complete today. As I wrote: I have specs for openafs already based on those from Matthew. Care to test/enhance them? I did not find the time to even build them after the last changes: http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/MISC.fdr/openafs/ -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 16:26:25 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 17:26:25 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > After looking at several kernel module proposals in the wiki and long > > discussions on mailing lists and during IRC meetings the Fedora Extras > > Steering Committee (also known as FESCo) agreed on a standard for > > packaging kernel modules in Fedora Extras. Find the details below for > > a last discussion on this mailing list before this proposal is being > > used. > > We can special-case kernel modules in the Extras buildsystem if we need > to, We have to in any case -- we at least need to get "-define kver foo" passed to rpmbuild with this scheme. And it is still undecided how and where to determinate "foo" in the buildsys. > and we can likely take some of the pain away by auto-building the > modules when a new kernel comes out somehow. Yeah, that would be very nice. > We'd then mail the > submitter if the auto-build failed. It's not hard, just ugly. > > Where it gets more interesting is if you want to build an updated SRPM > for a kernel that's not the most recent. In the past most people involved in the discussions said: Only build for the latest kernel. > We can also try to special-case the up/smp/hugemem thing if it's a pain > to do %foreach in the specfile. Is there any example how "%foreach" works? I still hope we can get the hardcoded variants up/smp/hugemem/xen-foo somehow out of the spec file and passed as define by the buildsys to rpmbuild, too. > We probably want to keep specfiles > cleaner and move some of the complexity into the build system to keep > the barrier-to-entry lower for packages themselves. Don't make it to simple -- kernel-modules belong into the kernel ;-) CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Jan 6 16:51:51 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:51:51 +0100 Subject: rpms/streamtuner/devel streamtuner.spec,1.1,1.2 In-Reply-To: <200601061515.k06FF651011167@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601061515.k06FF651011167@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060106175151.1f5c09ea.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:14:32 -0500, Matthias Haase wrote: > Author: endur > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/streamtuner/devel > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11138 > > Modified Files: > streamtuner.spec > Log Message: > desktop-file-utils dependency removed > > > Index: streamtuner.spec > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/streamtuner/devel/streamtuner.spec,v > retrieving revision 1.1 > retrieving revision 1.2 > diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 > --- streamtuner.spec 6 Jan 2006 13:37:47 -0000 1.1 > +++ streamtuner.spec 6 Jan 2006 15:14:32 -0000 1.2 > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > Summary: A stream directory browser > Name: streamtuner > Version: 0.99.99 > -Release: 6%{?dist} > +Release: 7%{?dist} > URL: http://streamtuner.sourceforge.net > Source0: http://download.savannah.nongnu.org/releases/streamtuner/streamtuner-0.99.99.tar.gz > Source1: %{name}.png > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ > Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils, scrollkeeper > BuildRequires: gtk2-devel, curl-devel, openssl-devel, python-devel, scrollkeeper > BuildRequires: taglib-devel, libidn-devel, pygtk2-devel, libxml2-devel > -BuildRequires: gettext, desktop-file-utils > +BuildRequires: gettext Removing the BR will break the build. Removing the Requires a few lines above would be correct, since the scriptlets no longer run desktop-update-database. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 16:55:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:55:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061655.k06GtoBF030104@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-06 11:55 EST ------- Creation of distribution branches in CVS can be requested in the Wiki: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC4Status http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC3Status If you uploaded your correct and undamaged SSH public key in the accounts system, if you configured plague-client and the needed certificates in your home directory, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildSystemClientSetup and if the problem persists, only the accounts system staff can find out what the problem with your account is. Help contact address is at the bottom of https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ Verifying the configuration steps and re-uploading your SSH public key might help meanwhile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:55:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:55:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061655.k06Gtpcm030109@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-06 11:55 EST ------- rpmlint isn't happy: # rpmlint perl-version-0.51-1.i386.rpm E: perl-version wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/version.pm "perl"E: perl-version non-executable-script /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/version.pm 0644 E: perl-version wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/version/vxs.pm "perl" E: perl-version non-executable-script /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/version/vxs.pm 0644 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:57:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:57:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061657.k06GviDs030481@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-06 11:57 EST ------- Although, CVS access would fail due to SSH key misconfiguration, so probably it's plague-client misconfiguration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:57:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:57:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061657.k06GvvwC030550@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-06 11:57 EST ------- In fedora %{_datadir} translates to /usr/share/ perhaps I should create /var/lib/nagios as a rw directory for Nagios as its home directory. I thought about using /var/log/nagios because it's already there and nagios has rw access to it but that doesn't seem appropriate for a home directory. These issues are more nagios-plugins related but I think nagios-plugins and nagios should have the same home directory for both plugins. Any thoughts? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 16:59:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 11:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061659.k06Gx1Sg030827@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 ------- Additional Comments From bugs at timj.co.uk 2006-01-06 11:58 EST ------- Any further comments or anyone willing to approve this package and sponsor 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 rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Jan 6 17:04:00 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:04:00 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > Where it gets more interesting is if you want to build an updated SRPM > > for a kernel that's not the most recent. > > In the past most people involved in the discussions said: Only build for > the latest kernel. People will not be able to update unless you build for all kernels. Consider the current nvidia disaster people are facing with the kernel drivers on livna. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 17:05:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:05:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177036] Review Request: perl-String-CRC32 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061705.k06H5pYb032342@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-String-CRC32 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177036 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpo at di.uminho.pt OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-06 12:05 EST ------- APPROVED MD5SUMS: 77ea84ae531b436665a1abb38b094f12 perl-String-CRC32-1.3-1.src.rpm 9b1675d86a68b7f6bc2ede02d4a212c2 perl-String-CRC32.spec 7683cd1b183a6af807f20ee5fd076d0b String-CRC32-1.3.tar.gz Sources: * String-CRC32-1.3.tar.gz: MD5 digest verified against a CPAN copy Good: * URL and Sources/Patches url valid * License verified (main pod page) * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * Builds without problems in FC-3 and FC-4 * (Un)installs without problems in FC-3 and FC-4 * No opened bugs in http://rt.cpan.org/NoAuth/Bugs.html?Dist=String-CRC32 Other perl-String-CRC32 related notes: * specfile very similar to the one I had attached to ticket 176175 * there isn't a bugzilla entry for the current core component * the license info in rawhide is wrong (reopened ticket 176175 to report 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 Fri Jan 6 17:08:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:08:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061708.k06H8m8G000478@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From endur at bennewitz.com 2006-01-06 12:08 EST ------- (In reply to comment #25) > Although, CVS access would fail due to SSH key misconfiguration, so probably > it's plague-client misconfiguration. I can successfully use other plague commands like list and list_builders. > If you uploaded your correct and undamaged SSH public key in the accounts > system This is done already, because there isn't any probblem with the CVS access, as I said. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 17:19:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:19:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061719.k06HJfl7002119@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2006-01-06 12:19 EST ------- That looks fine to me. (I'm not set up to be sponsor, otherwise I would) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 17:24:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:24:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061724.k06HOG2q003084@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-06 12:24 EST ------- Upon inspection of my /etc/passwd file I noticed a number of accounts that use /var/spool/name as their home directory (mail for example). Nagios already has rw access to its spool directory so I've made it the nagios home directory as well. SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-9.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 dominik at greysector.net Fri Jan 6 16:31:17 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:31:17 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <20060106163117.GB7405@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> On Friday, 06 January 2006 at 16:55, Jack Neely wrote: > Folks, > > Glad to see that somebody has been spending some time on this. I've > been very concerned about the complexity that the packager has to work > with. That seems a big focus in this spec file template and I think > that the usability of the template is pretty good compared to some of > the other spec files I've tried to work with. I would encurage > more comments in the template to identify the parts that the packager > would focus on. Also, the trade offs made are very sane. Seconded. Looks sane to me, too. > The only kernel module I really care about is OpenAFS which will not > build with the provided make commands. However, I don't think that is a > big problem. Well, I was about to submit acx (the driver for TI ACX1xx wifi cards), but the new proposal came out so I'll rework the spec and get back. Regards, R. -- APT/YUM RPM repository for Fedora Core http://rpm.greysector.net/ mpg321, xmp, faad2, lame, mad, *mplayer*, rdesktop, tin, xvid, mks, mutt "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 17:44:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:44:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061744.k06HiffB006644@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 12:44 EST ------- Here a couple of quick things I noticed that need to be corrected: 1. URL should be: http://www.wh-hms.uni-ulm.de/~mfcn/gnomeradio/ 2. SOURCE should be: http://www.wh-hms.uni-ulm.de/~mfcn/%{name}/packages/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz 3. Your missing: Requires(post): scrollkeeper - refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-3c9f517f0cd4aaabb369a8805226d85dc2f02793 4. Desktop file is not correct: refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#head-37131c9c3cb4b69fdb1269f6e91fa9c413d2add1 5. Remove the %doc preceeding the help documents. 6. Missing Requires for GConf2: refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-ff64cd482595764f672082d5a3b83e1fc22962e8 I would suggest going over the packaging information on the Wiki, since many of the problems with your spec can find the resolution there. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/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 Fri Jan 6 18:13:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:13:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061813.k06IDxT1012139@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-06 13:13 EST ------- Fixed all except 5. Why should I remove %doc? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 18:34:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:34:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061834.k06IY6cH014805@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-06 13:33 EST ------- Thanks First of all, i'm quite new in packaging and in linux so i apologize for my future questions. About the soname problems with libupnp, libixml and libthreadutil, what can i do against that ?? * doesn't build with default RPM opt flags : what do you mean by this ? It compiles fine here. * must not strip the libraries, since that disables the debuginfo package : What do you mean and how to solve it ? * -devel subpackage ought to require full version-release of main package to stay in sync with the main package always (think about patches applied in updates, notes in %changelog, fixed run-time/link-time problems, e.g.) OK * much better Summary: Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) SDK OK * prefer 'install -p' to preserve timestamps OK I think Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp-1.2.1a-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 Fri Jan 6 18:36:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:36:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061836.k06Iak0c015225@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-06 13:36 EST ------- I forgot : * due to the soname problem, ldconfig creates an unowned link libupnp.so to the versioned library - this makes the version completely useless! : How to solve this ? * -devel subpackage is missing /usr/include/upnp directory : i have this directory in devel package. What is the problem ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 19:07:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:07:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061907.k06J782E020032@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 14:07 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Fixed all except 5. Why should I remove %doc? What benefit are you getting by keeping it? It's not like your using RPM to create a package-specific documentation directory during installation for these files. Also, I'm not aware of any other spec in FE that marks the help documentation with the %doc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 19:24:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:24:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061924.k06JO1hC023323@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 14:23 EST ------- Oh, glancing at your most recent changes to the spec file, you have an error in the %preun section. You need to replace [NAME] with %{name}. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 19:28:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:28:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176784] Review Request: gnome-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061928.k06JS77e024587@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176784 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 14:27 EST ------- Looks pretty good. Built fine in Mock, though I'm wondering if you should have a BR on scrollkeeper (refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-3c9f517f0cd4aaabb369a8805226d85dc2f02793) I'm unable to verify that everything runs as expected, since I'm not running Rawhide yet, but I'm not getting any errors with rpmlint on the binary rpm produced with Mock. Unfortunately, I can't sponser new members, so someone else will need to do an offical review for 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 6 17:17:06 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:17:06 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 18:04 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > > > Where it gets more interesting is if you want to build an updated SRPM > > > for a kernel that's not the most recent. > > > > In the past most people involved in the discussions said: Only build for > > the latest kernel. > People will not be able to update unless you build for all kernels. This is a yum problem and will hopefully be fixed by the plugin (and if the problem you are referring to even exists with the new standard is doubtful). > Consider the current nvidia disaster people are facing with the kernel > drivers on livna. You mean this "disaster" that is around for ~two years already? Seems people ignored it for a long time and it works mostly fine for a lot of people. (if people wonder what we are talking about see http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=725 ) -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 6 19:40:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:40:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177082] Review Request: wm-icons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061940.k06JeI32027360@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com CC| |wtogami at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-06 14:40 EST ------- At this line: "Release : 2.FC4%{?dist}" Remove FC4 line since "%{?dist} already handle the release version (fc3, fc4, fc5). On %doc line, INSTALL can be removed because users will do either rpm and yum install. After making modification on both spec and SRPM, these packages should be accepted for the next step. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 19:41:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:41:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061941.k06JfHuk027569@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-06 14:41 EST ------- At this line: "Release : 2.FC4%{?dist}" Remove FC4 line since "%{?dist} already handle the release version (fc3, fc4, fc5). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 19:42:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:42:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601061942.k06JgAea027745@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-06 14:41 EST ------- At this line: "Release : 2.FC4%{?dist}" Remove FC4 line since "%{?dist} already handle the release version (fc3, fc4, fc5). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:11:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:11:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062011.k06KBnJ3001813@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 15:11 EST ------- NEEDSWORK MD5Sums: ae0c5fab486e28ef1aa367fabc1ef14b nucleo-0.5.tar.bz2 Good: * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines Needswork: * Package needs additional BuildRequires. Fails to build in Mock. Refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/Mock * Desirable features need extra BuildRequires: jpeg, png, opengl support, etc. * Buildroot lacks certain elements. Refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#head-c2cfbc6be2860c5d2634d06714098e1560667de6 * Specified Source URL is not canonical * License is LGPL, not GPL. * Some directories need to be owned by this package * As Luya stated in comment #1, drop the .FC4 fromn the Release tag. * Drop the Packager, Vendor, and AutoReqProv tags. NOTE: This is only an initial look, but there are quite a few items that need to be corrected, before this can be approved. I would suggest reading all the packaging information at the wiki, because new contributors need to show knowledge of the Fedora Extras packaging process before they will be sponsored. If you have additional questions that the wiki doesn't provide answers to, I would suggest contacting one of the projects mentors. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mentors#head-d2eb2f28b87db88601c40276b4310f18002412ce -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:24:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:24:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062024.k06KODQb004528@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at conversis.de 2006-01-06 15:23 EST ------- I just tried to boot with a current svn checkout but the system still doesn't output anything after "Switching to new root and running init" and a few line of "unmounting old XYZ". I'm always doing a complete reinstall ("rpm -e" followed by "rm -rf /etc/initng" and removal of the initng lines in grub.conf) but while I was able to boot the system with older versions of initng (plus some tweaks) things have gotten worse for me with every release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:25:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:25:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177166] New: Review Request: perl-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression 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=177166 Summary: Review Request: perl-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Compress-Bzip2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.09-1.src.rpm Description: The Compress::Bzip2 module provides a Perl interface to the Bzip2 compression library. A relevant subset of the functionality provided by Bzip2 is available in Compress::Bzip2. All string parameters can either be a scalar or a scalar reference. The module can be split into two general areas of functionality, namely in-memory compression/decompression and read/write access to bzip2 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 Fri Jan 6 20:26:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:26:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062026.k06KQJ3w005203@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 triad at df.lth.se changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|174504 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-06 15:25 EST ------- Fixed blocking bug, sorry... (My first 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 Fri Jan 6 20:27:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:27:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177167] New: Review Request: perl-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm 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=177167 Summary: Review Request: perl-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Digest-MD4.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Digest-MD4-1.5-1.src.rpm Description: The Digest::MD4 module allows you to use the RSA Data Security Inc. MD4 Message Digest algorithm from within Perl programs. The algorithm takes as input a message of arbitrary length and produces as output a 128-bit "fingerprint" or "message digest" of the input. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:30:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:30:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177168] New: Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function 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=177168 Summary: Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-UNIVERSAL-isa.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-UNIVERSAL-isa-0.05-1.src.rpm Description: Whenever you use "isa" in UNIVERSAL as a function, a kitten using Test::MockObject dies. Normally, the kittens would be helpless, but if they use UNIVERSAL::isa (the module whose docs you are reading), the kittens can live long and prosper. This module replaces UNIVERSAL::isa with a version that makes sure that if it's called as a function on objects which override isa, isa will be called on those objects as a method. In all other cases the real UNIVERSAL::isa is just called directly. Note: new requirement of perl-Test-MockObject -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:35:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:35:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062035.k06KZCoa007204@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-06 15:35 EST ------- Build failure under mock is fixed in 0.21-2, in the same location. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:49:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:49:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168523] Review Request: perl-Text-Diff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062049.k06KnQJF010087@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Diff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168523 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-06 15:49 EST ------- Steven, Could you import and build this one? It has already been approved several months ago. jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 20:55:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:55:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176946] Review Request: python-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062055.k06KtqvO011037@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176946 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 15:55 EST ------- PUBLISH +1 MD5Sums: 85cc43faf40f8aefdb5885bdabc1a94c feedparser-4.0.2.zip Good: * Source URL is canonical * Upstream source tarball verified * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines * Group Tag is from the official list * Buildroot has all required elements * All paths begin with macros * All directories are owned by this or other packages * No deprecated fields used * All necessary BuildRequires listed. * All desired features are enabled * Package rebuilds as non-root user * Package installs and uninstalls cleanly on FC4. * Software runs fine Minor: * Rpmlint errors: Most of the file in the %docs section appear to have permission of 666, which can be corrected when you import the package into CVS. 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 Jan 6 21:18:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:18:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168523] Review Request: perl-Text-Diff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062118.k06LIm7U015186@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Diff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168523 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-01-06 16:18 EST ------- Sorry, I didn't catch that this one was approved. I'm importing it 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 Fri Jan 6 21:48:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:48:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173550] Review Request: xfce4-netload-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062148.k06LmHqp021972@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-netload-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173550 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-06 16:48 EST ------- Passed test. Succesfully built via mock. Ready to be rolled on 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 Fri Jan 6 21:59:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:59:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062159.k06LxmRf025353@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 jspaleta at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jspaleta at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-06 16:59 EST ------- Okay it builds in mock I'll start the formal review this evening. A couple of small questions about the build.log There is a check for xmlto which fails. Is this spurious or does this represent some sort of optional functinality which could be turned on if xmlto was one of the buildrequires? There is also a check for gfortran, is that just buildtime noise or would there be something fortran specific that would be built if gfortran was available at build 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 Jan 6 22:01:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:01:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176943] Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062201.k06M1uNU025731@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176943 jspaleta at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jspaleta at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-06 17:01 EST ------- Okay builds in mock against development. I'll see if I can get to the formal review tonite after battlestar. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 22:27:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:27:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062227.k06MRjof029870@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-06 17:27 EST ------- xmlto is used to convert the doc from xml to html if it's available, but there's an already-formatted copy which is used if xmlto isn't found. The check for gfortran must be noise -- there's nothing in there that would use it if it were found. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 22:37:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:37:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173661] Review Request: xfce4-fsguard-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062237.k06MbFtp031347@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-fsguard-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173661 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-06 17:37 EST ------- Spec is good. Mock succesfully built from SRPMS, rpmlint passed. Set to FE-ACCEPT. Congragulation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 6 22:55:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:55:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176784] Review Request: gnome-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601062255.k06Mthj4002220@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-schedule: A GTK+ based user interface for cron and at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176784 ------- Additional Comments From frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de 2006-01-06 17:55 EST ------- Thank you for your comments. Regarding BR on scrollkeeper: It's not needed here. In this case gnome-doc-utils is used for documentation building, which is already a BR. The only invoking of scrollkeeper without --disable-scrollkeeper is a scrollkeeper-update. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 00:03:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:03:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070003.k0703FZd011992@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-06 19:02 EST ------- Ok, devel is down to 1 issue: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2607-wine-0.9.5-1.fc5/i386/build.log It does not detect libglut from the freeglut package and thus does not create the dll.so. If you compare builds for FC4 and devel BR freeglut-devel seems to work for fc4 but not for devel. glutMainLoop is present in 2.2.x (fc4) and 2.4.x (devel) so I don't see what causes this to fail. Ideas? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 00:15:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:15:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070015.k070FjQa013580@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-06 19:15 EST ------- > About the soname problems with libupnp, libixml and libthreadutil, > what can i do against that ?? Not much unless you convince the upstream authors to introduce a library version. There exist other libraries with the same soname problem. > doesn't build with default RPM opt flags : what do you mean by this ? > It compiles fine here. I see compiler flags like this during build: gcc -Wall -I./ -I../inc -I../../pil/inc -fPIC -c -Wall -Os -DNDEBUG -I. -I../inc -Iinc -c ixml.c -o obj/ixml.o It doesn't use Fedora's default compiler flags during compilation. These are defined within the rpmbuild configuration, see e.g. output of, rpm --eval '%optflags' and are exported automatically in the %build section of an RPM package spec file when using the %configure macro. Where you don't use the %configure macro, you can work with the %optflags macro or with the ${RPM_OPT_FLAGS} variable in a spec file and pass a modified CFLAGS environment variable to "make" (or other variables for other programming languages). It may be necessary to patch the source code Makefiles in order to drop hardcoded compiler/linker flags and make them accept external optflags instead. > must not strip the libraries, since that disables the debuginfo > package : What do you mean and how to solve it ? After compiling/linking the libraries, the Makefiles must not run "strip" on them. If they do, rpmbuild's internal means of extracting debug information for a "-debuginfo" sub-package are disabled. > ldconfig creates an unowned link libupnp.so to the versioned > library - this makes the version completely useless! : How to > solve this ? First of all, you would need to specify %{_libdir}/libupnp.so in your %files section and create the link in your %install section, so RPM knows that the link belongs into your package. That would fix one part if the problem. The other part is the soname versioning problem as explained before. > -devel subpackage is missing /usr/include/upnp directory : i have > this directory in devel package. What is the problem ? You don't include the _directory_ in the devel package. You only include the files inside the directory. Query "rpm -qlv libupnp-devel". Take your pick. Either patch as following would work and would also include the directory (the latter one includes the directory and its contents recursively): --- libupnp.spec.orig 2006-01-05 19:12:15.000000000 +0100 +++ libupnp.spec 2006-01-07 01:12:01.000000000 +0100 @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ %files devel %defattr(-,root,root,-) +%dir %{_includedir}/upnp %{_includedir}/upnp/* %clean --- libupnp.spec.orig 2006-01-05 19:12:15.000000000 +0100 +++ libupnp.spec 2006-01-07 01:13:04.000000000 +0100 @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ %files devel %defattr(-,root,root,-) -%{_includedir}/upnp/* +%{_includedir}/upnp/ %clean rm -rf %{buildroot} -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 00:21:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:21:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070021.k070LMcA014587@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de 2006-01-06 19:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Fixed all except 5. Why should I remove %doc? "%doc preceeding the help documents" - Perhaps a misunderstanding? The %doc tag was meant, not the %doc line before. PackageReviewGuidelines: - 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. This is what I read out of it: If help files are not present due to install with --excludedocs you will hopefully get an error message when pressing a help button. Thus it affects the runtime of your application. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 00:43:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:43:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070043.k070hINI017252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-06 19:43 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > "%doc preceeding the help documents" - Perhaps a misunderstanding? > The %doc tag was meant, not the %doc line before. Correct. I was referring to help documents (%{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}/), not the README, AUTHORS, etc. line. Speaking of which though, you also need to add the COPYING 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 Sat Jan 7 01:25:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 20:25:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070125.k071PJTX021625@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-06 20:25 EST ------- > >'initscripts' itself is not tight very much into the system; e.g. my > >tor-vserver (with 'tor-minit') has it only because of > > Well, thats your system... on my pretty much default fedora devel > test box I get: ok, devel test boxes and tor servers are having completely different requirements. E.g. the devel box needs gcc, editors, perhaps cups and a complete networking. The tor server does not need these programs (which add complexity and additional potential points of failures). tor server and clients should not have a complete networking (e.g. no DNS, fake hostname) to increase anonymity. > If you have a need to remove that, wouldn't you just keep a local > version of the package that doesn't depend on initscripts/lsb? Current packaging (with split lsb and initng initmethod) satisfies both needs: Those who want to use tor on a devel test box can install the bloaty lsb subpackage, while those who want to use it productivily (whatever that means for "tor") can install the minit/ining subpackages with minimal deps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 01:31:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 20:31:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070131.k071Vs2k022365@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-06 20:31 EST ------- Just a suggestion - I would personally be a little more detailed on the %description: IE %description Gnomeradio is a FM-radio tuner for the GNOME desktop. It should work with every FM tuner card that is supported by video4linux. Remote controls are supported via LIRC-support. Gnomeradio can also record radio as a Wave or Ogg files. -=- That's from the homepage and modified a little bit. And I think you need a line break every 80 characters or so (which I didn't do 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 Sat Jan 7 04:36:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 23:36:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176943] Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070436.k074aqC9018194@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176943 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-06 23:36 EST ------- Formal review Summary: 1 blocker - BAD: Forgot to include the COPYING file in the %docs section Get that fixed and you have approval. - GOOD: rpmlint on mock built binary returns clean. - GOOD: package named according to the PackageNamingGuidelines. - GOOD: The spec file name matches %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec - GOOD: The package meets the PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: The package is licensed GPL - GOOD: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - GOOD: The spec written in American English. - GOOD: The spec file is legible. - GOOD: The sources used to build matches the upstream source md5sum 39e3a876b991fe235af3150335d1a0f8 - GOOD: The package successfully compile and build into binary rpms on atleast x86 - GOOD: No BuildRequires and it still builds in mock - GOOD: No locales - GOOD: No shared library files - GOOD: own all directories that it creates. uses /usr/bin/ and /usr/share/man/man1 which are explicitly listed in the FHS and owned by filesystem package - GOOD: no duplicates in %files listing. - GOOD: Permissions on files are set properly. - GOOD: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - GOOD: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: 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. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 7 06:25:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 07:25:37 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 18:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 18:04 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > > > > > Where it gets more interesting is if you want to build an updated SRPM > > > > for a kernel that's not the most recent. > > > > > > In the past most people involved in the discussions said: Only build for > > > the latest kernel. > > People will not be able to update unless you build for all kernels. > > This is a yum problem and will hopefully be fixed by the plugin (and if > the problem you are referring to even exists with the new standard is > doubtful). I think we are talking pass each other. The problem I am talking about is not a yum problem, it's a general packaging policy problem, concerning "parallel installation", closely related to compat-library packages. However, unlike for library-packages, where parallel installation is an exception, for kernels and kernel-modules, parallel installation is the rule (cf. below). > > Consider the current nvidia disaster people are facing with the kernel > > drivers on livna. > > You mean this "disaster" that is around for ~two years already? If you mean that kernel-module updates with livna modules have never worked smoothly with yum, yes. > Seems people ignored it for a long time and it works mostly fine for > a lot of people. It doesn't work for anybody. The fedora-users@ list is filled with postings from people complaining about these issues ever since fedora exists. > (if people wonder what we are talking about see > http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=725 ) Let me demonstrate the problem, as it currently happens: Given a clean FC4 system with livna's nvidia packages installed, not having been updated for some weeks (During this time, a kernel and a kernel-module/userspace library update has taken place) # rpm -qa 'kernel*' nvidia-glx kernel-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 nvidia-glx-1.0.8174-0.lvn.1.4 kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4-1.0.8174-0.lvn.1.4 # yum update ... Resolving Dependencies --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. ---> Package kernel.i686 0:2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 set to be installed ---> Package nvidia-glx.i386 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated --> Running transaction check --> Processing Dependency: kernel-module-nvidia = 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 for package: nvidia-glx --> Processing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 for package: kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 --> Restarting Dependency Resolution with new changes. --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. ---> Package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1653_FC4.i686 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated --> Running transaction check --> Processing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 for package: kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Missing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 is needed by package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 => A required package is missing. yum is correct in aborting. Could you please explain, how this kind of breakage is solved with FC5, your kernel-module RFC and the yum-plugin you mentioned? The only way I see, is to add the missing packages to the repos, i.e. to rebuild the kernel-modules and module-userspace-libs for all kernels having ever been shipped for a Fedora release: # yum update --enablerepo=local .. Resolving Dependencies --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. ---> Package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4.i686 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated ---> Package kernel.i686 0:2.6.14-1.1656_FC4 set to be installed ---> Package nvidia-glx.i386 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated ... Installing: kernel i686 2.6.14-1.1656_FC4 updates-released 14 M Updating: kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 i686 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 local 1.5 M nvidia-glx i386 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 livna 3.9 M ... I guess, this is what I assume you are referring to as "yum bug": Yum updates the kernel, but doesn't add the kernel-module corresponding to the "new being installed" kernel. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 07:11:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 02:11:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070711.k077Br6C002839@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 florin at andrei.myip.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |florin at andrei.myip.org ------- Additional Comments From florin at andrei.myip.org 2006-01-07 02:11 EST ------- This is very cool, thanks everyone! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 08:23:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 03:23:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601070823.k078NLpq012487@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-07 03:23 EST ------- Most likely a missing modular Xorg devel require in freeglut-devel so try adding libX****-devel to BR . You could take a look at the freeglut headers to see which other headers they need. Might even be zlib-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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sat Jan 7 09:21:40 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:51:40 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? Message-ID: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> I am encountering two (or even three) different approaches about the %{?dist} tag in Extras, which has made me somehow confused. These are the somehow contradicting advices: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildRequests : It is recommended to use the suffix %{?dist} in the release field to distinguish builds for different OS versions. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines If you wish to use a single spec file to build for multiple distributions, you can use the %{dist} tag in the Release field. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag It is documented and standardized so that maintainers who wish to use it can do so. So, the question is: how is a maintainer supposed to make his mind? Should he take the BuildRequests advice and use it, unless he has a good reason he shouldn't? Or should he take the other advices and do it only if he wishes to, or when he believes it's really *needed*? roozbeh From mpeters at mac.com Sat Jan 7 09:42:08 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:42:08 -0800 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136626929.2899.53.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 12:51 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I am encountering two (or even three) different approaches about the > %{?dist} tag in Extras, which has made me somehow confused. > > These are the somehow contradicting advices: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildRequests : > > It is recommended to use the suffix %{?dist} in the release field > to distinguish builds for different OS versions. True > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines > > If you wish to use a single spec file to build for multiple > distributions, you can use the %{dist} tag in the Release field. Also True. Single spec file, if possible, is less maintenance work as well. When it is not possible - it usually is because supporting libraries are not new enough for a newer version. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag > > It is documented and standardized so that maintainers who wish to use > it can do so. True > > So, the question is: how is a maintainer supposed to make his mind? I always use it. I don't believe it is required, but using it makes it very clear which distribution it was built for - and also signals yum that it needs to be upgraded when you upgrade your distribution. > Should he take the BuildRequests advice and use it, unless he has a good > reason he shouldn't? Or should he take the other advices and do it only > if he wishes to, or when he believes it's really *needed*? AFAIK it is optional, but I think the benefits make it worth it. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 10:01:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 05:01:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071001.k07A1gUD024950@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-07 05:01 EST ------- Rebuild (0.10.2-2): - hardcoded 0.10.2 instead of using %{version} in Patch0 - in %prep: find python/examples -type f | xargs chmod -x - license in all sub-packages Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/clearsilver/clearsilver.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/clearsilver/clearsilver-0.10.2-2.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 pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Sat Jan 7 10:31:11 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 02:31:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> We can also try to special-case the up/smp/hugemem thing if it's a pain >> to do %foreach in the specfile. > > Is there any example how "%foreach" works? > > I still hope we can get the hardcoded variants up/smp/hugemem/xen-foo > somehow out of the spec file and passed as define by the buildsys to > rpmbuild, too. Yes, please. The up/smp/blaa needs to go away from the spec, it's just hideous. My humble 5 cents :) - Panu - From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 10:38:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 05:38:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071038.k07AclhD029622@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From endur at bennewitz.com 2006-01-07 05:38 EST ------- All builds are done successful. > it's plague-client misconfiguration. I couldn't found errors in ~/.plague-client.cfg, but anyway, it is working as expected today. -- Matthias -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 10:39:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 05:39:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071039.k07AdrVg029930@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-07 05:39 EST ------- Hm it just inlcudes gl.h und glu.h which should be present from the mesa requires... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 11:36:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 06:36:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177036] Review Request: perl-String-CRC32 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071136.k07BaH4m006648@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-String-CRC32 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177036 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-07 06:36 EST ------- Built for FC-3 and FC-4. Request for removal of devel branch posted at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 12:27:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 07:27:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177204] New: Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization 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=177204 Summary: Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: roozbeh at farsiweb.info QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit-0.8-0.1.rc5.src.rpm Description: The Translate Toolkit includes programs to convert various localization formats to the common gettext PO format and vice versa, and programs to check and manage PO files. Also part of the package are programs to create word counts, merge translations, and perform various checks on PO files. Known issues: rpmlint nags with messages like the following: E: translate-toolkit non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/translate/convert/pot2po.py 0644 Which are because some python modules in the package start with "#!...", something that has helped upstream debug them. I believe the messages are ignorable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 12:44:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 07:44:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177167] Review Request: perl-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071244.k07Ciit0015248@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177167 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |paul at city-fan.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-07 07:44 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is same as perl, matches spec - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds OK in mock on FC4 (i386) - no explicit buildrequires present nor needed - no locales, libraries, subpackages, or pkgconfigs to worry about - not relocatable - no directory ownership or permissions problems - 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 entry needed - no scriptlets 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 7 12:50:57 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:50:57 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 02:31 -0800 schrieb Panu Matilainen: > On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > >> We can also try to special-case the up/smp/hugemem thing if it's a pain > >> to do %foreach in the specfile. > > > > Is there any example how "%foreach" works? > > > > I still hope we can get the hardcoded variants up/smp/hugemem/xen-foo > > somehow out of the spec file and passed as define by the buildsys to > > rpmbuild, too. > > Yes, please. The up/smp/blaa needs to go away from the spec, it's just > hideous. My humble 5 cents :) Panu (or everybody else of course), any idea how to implement it? I searched a bit for the syntax of "%foreach", but wasn't able to find anything. We of course could add a lot of "--with smp" "--with foo", put we still would have to hardcode the names :-| . -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 12:52:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 07:52:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177206] New: Review Request: perl-Digest-MD2 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=177206 Summary: Review Request: perl-Digest-MD2 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Digest-MD2/perl-Digest-MD2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Digest-MD2/perl-Digest-MD2-2.03-1.src.rpm Description: The Digest::MD2 module allows you to use the RSA Data Security Inc. MD2 Message Digest algorithm from within Perl programs. The algorithm takes as input a message of arbitrary length and produces as output a 128-bit "fingerprint" or "message digest" of the input. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Sat Jan 7 13:12:30 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:12:30 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 13:50 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Panu (or everybody else of course), any idea how to implement it? I > searched a bit for the syntax of "%foreach", but wasn't able to find > anything. We of course could add a lot of "--with smp" "--with foo", > put we still would have to hardcode the names :-| . I did tell you it wasn't pretty. http://david.woodhou.se/modspec.tar.gz -- dwmw2 From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 7 13:20:40 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 14:20:40 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 07:25 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 18:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 18:04 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > > Consider the current nvidia disaster people are facing with the kernel > > > drivers on livna. > > > > You mean this "disaster" that is around for ~two years already? > If you mean that kernel-module updates with livna modules have never > worked smoothly with yum, yes. That's why we discuss this stuff here and work on a proposal that works better. We know that we need support from yum (or a yum-plugin) to make it work smoothly. > > Seems people ignored it for a long time and it works mostly fine for > > a lot of people. > It doesn't work for anybody. We know. > > (if people wonder what we are talking about see > > http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=725 ) > > Let me demonstrate the problem, as it currently happens: > > Given a clean FC4 system with livna's nvidia packages installed, not > having been updated for some weeks (During this time, a kernel and a > kernel-module/userspace library update has taken place) > > # rpm -qa 'kernel*' nvidia-glx > kernel-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 > nvidia-glx-1.0.8174-0.lvn.1.4 > kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4-1.0.8174-0.lvn.1.4 > > > # yum update > ... > Resolving Dependencies > --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. > ---> Package kernel.i686 0:2.6.14-1.1653_FC4 set to be installed > ---> Package nvidia-glx.i386 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated > --> Running transaction check > --> Processing Dependency: kernel-module-nvidia = 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 for package: nvidia-glx > --> Processing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 for package: kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 > --> Restarting Dependency Resolution with new changes. > --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. > ---> Package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1653_FC4.i686 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated > --> Running transaction check > --> Processing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 for package: kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > Error: Missing Dependency: nvidia-glx = 0:1.0.8174 is needed by package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 > > => A required package is missing. yum is correct in aborting. > > Could you please explain, how this kind of breakage is solved with FC5, > your kernel-module RFC and the yum-plugin you mentioned? The yum plugin doesn't exist yet, so no, I can't. But in the new scheme the "$(uname -r)" parts isn't in the name of the package anymore, so this problems shouldn't show up. So discussing it here in this scope is irrelevant afaics. Correct me if I'm wrong, maybe I overlooked something. There are other problems, that hopefully are handled by the plugin. > The only way I see, is to add the missing packages to the repos, i.e. to > rebuild the kernel-modules and module-userspace-libs for all kernels > having ever been shipped for a Fedora release: This was discussed earlier. People didn't like the idea - they only wanted to build for the latest kernel. I disagree -- we IMHO should build for the latest kernel and the one that was shipped in core. Why? There are people with modems or bandwidth-per-month limitations that don't update the kernel. Yes, that's dangerous, but people do it. But we can't build for all kernels. This wastes to much time IMHO. And old kernels are deleted for the updates-repo anyway -- building therefor is not possible (no, maintaining a local all-old-kernels-repo also is wasted time IMHO). > # yum update --enablerepo=local > .. > Resolving Dependencies > --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. > ---> Package kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4.i686 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated > ---> Package kernel.i686 0:2.6.14-1.1656_FC4 set to be installed > ---> Package nvidia-glx.i386 0:1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 set to be updated > ... > Installing: > kernel i686 2.6.14-1.1656_FC4 updates-released 14 M > Updating: > kernel-module-nvidia-2.6.14-1.1644_FC4 i686 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 local 1.5 M > nvidia-glx i386 1.0.8178-0.lvn.1.4 livna 3.9 M > ... > I guess, this is what I assume you are referring to as "yum bug": "yum bug" is probably not the right name -- "yum <-> old-kernel-module standard problems" would probably a better description > Yum > updates the kernel, but doesn't add the kernel-module corresponding to > the "new being installed" kernel. It can't with the old scheme without special knowledge of that scheme. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From rc040203 at freenet.de Sat Jan 7 13:49:26 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 14:49:26 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 14:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 07:25 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 18:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 18:04 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > Am Freitag, den 06.01.2006, 11:12 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > > > Consider the current nvidia disaster people are facing with the kernel > > > > drivers on livna. > > > > > > You mean this "disaster" that is around for ~two years already? > > If you mean that kernel-module updates with livna modules have never > > worked smoothly with yum, yes. > > That's why we discuss this stuff here and work on a proposal that works > better. > > We know that we need support from yum (or a yum-plugin) to make it work > smoothly. > > > > Seems people ignored it for a long time and it works mostly fine for > > > a lot of people. > > It doesn't work for anybody. > > We know. I didn't necessarily have this impression :( > > The only way I see, is to add the missing packages to the repos, i.e. to > > rebuild the kernel-modules and module-userspace-libs for all kernels > > having ever been shipped for a Fedora release: > > This was discussed earlier. People didn't like the idea - they only > wanted to build for the latest kernel. Sorry, but these people have no idea about what they are talking. You are shipping a broken distribution. Therefore you can't avoid fixing it. This time it affects livna and nvidia, but the problem actually is much more general and at least affects all kernel-modules which are accompanied by userspace libraries/tools > I disagree -- we IMHO should build for the latest kernel and the one > that was shipped in core. ... and at least the (latest-1) kernel, because this is the kernel people which regularly (but not daily basis) update are using. > Why? There are people with modems or > bandwidth-per-month limitations that don't update the kernel. Yes, > that's dangerous, but people do it. Another aspect you seem to ignore: It's not uncommon that kernels are broken on a particular HW - Therefore users, can't avoid resorting to using older kernel. > But we can't build for all kernels. I don't buy that. Write yourself a script to generate the specs, and let them be built on a built system. > This wastes to much time IMHO. Building will probably take will take some hours, but even some individual rpms probably are more demanding than building this bunch of packages. > And > old kernels are deleted for the updates-repo anyway Then building for all those in updates + core would be a reasonable compromise. Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 7 14:13:21 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:13:21 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136643201.2716.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 14:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 07:25 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: >[...] > > I disagree -- we IMHO should build for the latest kernel and the one > > that was shipped in core. > > ... and at least the (latest-1) kernel, because this is the kernel > people which regularly (but not daily basis) update are using. Maybe. > > Why? There are people with modems or > > bandwidth-per-month limitations that don't update the kernel. Yes, > > that's dangerous, but people do it. > > Another aspect you seem to ignore: It's not uncommon that kernels are > broken on a particular HW - Therefore users, can't avoid resorting to > using older kernel. They can rebuild the SRPM. And the problem you describe only happens when a kernel is updated, it is broken on a particular HW, you need a kernel-module, the userland-package that depends on a kernel-module was updated at the same time *and* you/the download servers don't have the old userland package around anymore. Not a situation that happens every day afaics. >[...] > > And > > old kernels are deleted for the updates-repo anyway > Then building for all those in updates + core would be a reasonable > compromise. What do others think about this compromise? -- Thorsten Leemhuis From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sat Jan 7 14:31:01 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:31:01 -0600 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > The most important rule for packages with kernel modules: There are > always at least two SRPMS -- one builds a userland package (tools, > documentation, license, udev configuration etc) of the source, the other > builds packages with *only* the kernel-module(s). The packager is free > to split the userland-package further into one with a the general > userland parts, that works fine without the kernel-modules, one with > the kernel-module related parts and one with the kernel-module(s). > The userland package with the parts that are related to the > kernel-module(s) must follow follow the standard guidelines for Fedora > Extras packages with one additional rule: > - MUST: The package needs to require the belonging kernel-module > with something like "Requires: kmod-%{name} = %{version}" What happens if a driver gets merged into the kernel upstream? Or if davej et. al decide to put it in the Core kernel package for one reason or another? Will the Core kernel package now have to have a Provides/Obsoletes: kmod-%{name} ? Cases like this probably won't come up all that much, but it will happen. In general, what happens when a module moves from Extras to Core? > > Besides rules around the packaging there is one additional *before* > you start packaging a kernel module for Fedora Extras: Open a Review > bug in http://bugzilla.redhat.com and ask FESCo for permission if this > module is allowed for Extras. This requires that you give at least the > following informations: > - Name of the package > - URL of the project and a tarball of the latest version > - License > - A publishable explanation from the author(s) why the module is not > merged with the mainline kernel yet and when it's planed to get > merged. You of course can ask the author to explain it directly in the > bug report. > Why all this? > - The Fedora Project wants to encourage driver developers to merge their > sources in the kernel > - It easier for everyone if the modules are in the main kernel > - There is often a good reason why the kernel developers refuse to merge > a driver. If it's not good enough for the kernel, why should it be > good enough for Fedora? > - Most modules that are maintained independently of the kernel have > licensing issues that also make it impossible to ship them in Fedora > Extras. There are some modules out there that have no intentions of merging into upstream, such as openAFS. That fact alone shouldn't be a reason to not package it for Extras. josh From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 7 14:38:51 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:38:51 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:51:40 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I am encountering two (or even three) different approaches about the > %{?dist} tag in Extras, which has made me somehow confused. > > These are the somehow contradicting advices: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildRequests : > > It is recommended to use the suffix %{?dist} in the release field > to distinguish builds for different OS versions. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines > > If you wish to use a single spec file to build for multiple > distributions, you can use the %{dist} tag in the Release field. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag > > It is documented and standardized so that maintainers who wish to use > it can do so. > > So, the question is: how is a maintainer supposed to make his mind? > Should he take the BuildRequests advice and use it, unless he has a good > reason he shouldn't? Or should he take the other advices and do it only > if he wishes to, or when he believes it's really *needed*? Where is the part you find "somehow contradicting"? In all three quotes, using %{?dist} is either recommended or described as being optional. This dist tag macro exists in order to aid you. "recommended" is not equal to "mandatory". When not using %{?dist}, you need to find another way to ensure that %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} of a package for an older distribution is "higher than" epoch:version-release of the package for a later distribution. Without the dist tag, you would probably increment %release or make a big jump to a much higher number, e.g. FC3 => release 1, FC4 => release 10, so all package releases for the later distribution are seen as newer. (Btw, for distribution upgrades, which don't perform an online upgrade of Fedora Extras packages prior to first boot, using %{dist} is insufficent. [Same applies to CD based distribution upgrades. Any Fedora Extras update package for the older distribution version may be seen as newer than a CD snapshot copy of a Fedora Extras package for the newer distribution, e.g. 4.fc3 > 1.fc4, so while %{dist} is helpful for our current Fedora Extras online repository, it is not a silver bullet.]) From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 7 15:00:55 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:00:55 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 08:31 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > The most important rule for packages with kernel modules: There are > > always at least two SRPMS -- one builds a userland package (tools, > > documentation, license, udev configuration etc) of the source, the other > > builds packages with *only* the kernel-module(s). The packager is free > > to split the userland-package further into one with a the general > > userland parts, that works fine without the kernel-modules, one with > > the kernel-module related parts and one with the kernel-module(s). > > The userland package with the parts that are related to the > > kernel-module(s) must follow follow the standard guidelines for Fedora > > Extras packages with one additional rule: > > - MUST: The package needs to require the belonging kernel-module > > with something like "Requires: kmod-%{name} = %{version}" > > What happens if a driver gets merged into the kernel upstream? Or if > davej et. al decide to put it in the Core kernel package for one reason > or another? Will the Core kernel package now have to have a > Provides/Obsoletes: kmod-%{name} ? No, I don't think this is necessary. The userland-package should be modified from Requires: kmod-%{name} = %{version} to Requires: kernel >= 2.6.15 or Conflicts: kernel <= 2.6.14 and rebuild and pushed after that. In an ideal world that should happen exactly at the same time the updated kernel is released. And with the next release of Core the userland-package probably needs to be dropped cause all parts (udev rules for example) often are a part of core then. The question is: what obsoletes the package so it gets removed? fedora-release? > Cases like this probably won't come up all that much I hope they will -- kernel-module authors should get their modules upstream. As soon as possible. Look for the current mess with WLAN drivers -- it's getting better now, but still is far from perfect. Or ivtv. Or special I2C-patches for DVB and V4L2 that don't work together. Shipping GPLed kernel-modules in Fedora Extras should therefor only be a interim solution for a kernel-module. The packager should make it as clear as possible to the module author that he should get his code merged with the upstream kernel. As soon as possible. (ohh, sorry, I did say that already ;-) ) We were even discussing a time-limit how long GPL-Modules are allowed to stay in extras (e.g. 18 or 24 months) until they either have to be merged with the kernel or dropped from extras. But we dropped the idea. >[...] > > Besides rules around the packaging there is one additional *before* > > you start packaging a kernel module for Fedora Extras: Open a Review > > bug in http://bugzilla.redhat.com and ask FESCo for permission if this > > module is allowed for Extras. This requires that you give at least the > > following informations: > > - Name of the package > > - URL of the project and a tarball of the latest version > > - License > > - A publishable explanation from the author(s) why the module is not > > merged with the mainline kernel yet and when it's planed to get > > merged. You of course can ask the author to explain it directly in the > > bug report. > > > > Why all this? > > - The Fedora Project wants to encourage driver developers to merge their > > sources in the kernel > > - It easier for everyone if the modules are in the main kernel > > - There is often a good reason why the kernel developers refuse to merge > > a driver. If it's not good enough for the kernel, why should it be > > good enough for Fedora? > > - Most modules that are maintained independently of the kernel have > > licensing issues that also make it impossible to ship them in Fedora > > Extras. > > There are some modules out there that have no intentions of merging into > upstream, such as openAFS. That fact alone shouldn't be a reason to not > package it for Extras. Of course. Hey, I even choose to work on the openafs packages ;-) (see other mail in this thread). But a lot of modules that are not part of the kernel were not yet merged for reasons that also make them not suitable for Fedora Extras. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 15:06:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 10:06:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173054] Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071506.k07F6DPC030398@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173054 ------- Additional Comments From lemenkov at newmail.ru 2006-01-07 10:06 EST ------- > It is commonly considered bad taste to mention the software name > in the Summary line. Keep the summary short and include relevant > keywords. That's enough. More details fit into the package description. Done. > Probably also s/wavpack/WavPack/gi since that is how they > spell it online. Done. Except the RPM-name. > * pkgconfig template file wavpack.pc.in contains hardcoded libdir, > which most likely breaks on multilib platforms if installed like > that. Needs a patch which does libdir=@libdir@ instead of > libdir=${prefix}/lib and provided that libdir will be defined and > substituted by the used autotools framework. > * pkgconfig file Cflags line is questionable. Adding a standard path > for headers to the search list is dangerous. Also, are WavPack > API users expected to do #include or > #include ? In case of the latter, the pkgconfig file > is wrong. > Same for Libs line. -L${libdir} disturbes library location search list > because libwavpack.so is installed into a standard location. Done. I also updated spec-file due to mainstream version change (4.3 -> 4.31). Spec Name or Url: http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SPECS/wavpack.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/wavpack-4.31-1.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 Sat Jan 7 15:18:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 10:18:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176943] Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071518.k07FIY7r031728@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176943 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-07 10:18 EST ------- COPYING added as %doc in -2: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/rootsh-1.5.2-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/rootsh.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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sat Jan 7 15:26:27 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 18:56:27 +0330 Subject: packages without %description Message-ID: <1136647587.3111.33.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> How important is a for a package to have a %description field? I just encountered one, and the question is if I should search for more packages and file bugs, or should I assume the packagers will add the description when they'll have the time? Or to ask the question the other way around: How could a package pass the review process if it didn't have a description field?! The bug is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177208 roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 15:44:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 10:44:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071544.k07FifQ2002887@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-07 10:44 EST ------- Looks like you're missing: BuildRequires: libXmu-devel, libXi-devel If you look at the configure.ac definition for that failed test case, the reasoning should be clear. :) dnl Check for glut32 library. AC_CHECK_LIB(glut,glutMainLoop, [AC_SUBST(GLUT_LIBS,"-lglut -lXmu -lXi") AC_SUBST(GLUT32FILES,'$(GLUT32FILES)')],, $OPENGL_LIBS $X_LIBS $X_PRE_LIBS -lXmu -lXi -lX11 $X_EXTRA_LIBS) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sat Jan 7 16:00:42 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:30:42 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Where is the part you find "somehow contradicting"? In all three quotes, > using %{?dist} is either recommended or described as being optional. > This dist tag macro exists in order to aid you. "recommended" is not > equal to "mandatory". I'm not talking about mandatory. I'm talking about the difference between "optional", as in "use it if you think you should", and "recommended", as in "use it if you are not sure you may need it or not". In some cases, when the packager has no strong feeling either way and he is tempted to not use it to avoid making the tag more complex, should he use it or not? For an example, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 where if I add the tag, the version will be something like "2.0-0.1.20060103cvs.fc4", which I call ugly. roozbeh From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sat Jan 7 16:01:53 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:31:53 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136649713.3111.46.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > (Btw, for distribution upgrades, which don't perform an online upgrade of > Fedora Extras packages prior to first boot, using %{dist} is insufficent. > [Same applies to CD based distribution upgrades. Any Fedora Extras update > package for the older distribution version may be seen as newer than a CD > snapshot copy of a Fedora Extras package for the newer distribution, e.g. > 4.fc3 > 1.fc4, so while %{dist} is helpful for our current Fedora Extras > online repository, it is not a silver bullet.]) Why not use fc3.4 and fc4.1 then? ;) roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 16:21:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 11:21:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177117] Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071621.k07GLN1F008300@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-07 11:21 EST ------- Fixed, but what's the point of adding %{dist} to Release? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 7 16:26:34 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:26:34 -0500 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136651194.3533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 19:30 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Where is the part you find "somehow contradicting"? In all three quotes, > > using %{?dist} is either recommended or described as being optional. > > This dist tag macro exists in order to aid you. "recommended" is not > > equal to "mandatory". > > I'm not talking about mandatory. I'm talking about the difference > between "optional", as in "use it if you think you should", and > "recommended", as in "use it if you are not sure you may need it or > not". > > In some cases, when the packager has no strong feeling either way and he > is tempted to not use it to avoid making the tag more complex, should he > use it or not? For an example, see: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 > where if I add the tag, the version will be something like > "2.0-0.1.20060103cvs.fc4", which I call ugly. What possible good reason could there be to argue for cosmetics over functionality in this case? "Recommended" is exactly what it says -- experienced individuals have determined that %{?dist} is useful, and thus their advice is to use it. It keeps you from having to maintain separate spec files per distribution release, which will save you time and effort should the build or installation dependencies diverge at some point. If you don't want to take advantage of those features, don't use it; how you spend your free time is entirely up to you. ;-) -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 16:30:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 11:30:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071630.k07GU16Z009414@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-07 11:29 EST ------- Looking over the specfile some more in context to the Packaging Guidelines... BuildPrereq: dbus-devel >= 0.22, libselinux-devel, libxml2-devel BuildPrereq: pam-devel, python-devel BuildPrereq: cyrus-sasl-devel, krb5-devel, openldap-devel Prereq: /sbin/chkconfig Should the BuildPrereq tags be replaced with BuildRequires? http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#head-c00c7e039df9f68a709ce2ceee6a5454edf16f8c And should the Prereq for chkconfig in the scriptlets be cast as a pair of tags: Requires(pre) Requires(post) since its called in both pre and post scriptlets? http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#head-24e6fc168588eeaa2f8000bf5516fc56dcfcf461 And since you also use /sbin/service in the preun script don't you also need a Requires(pre): /sbin/service ? rpmlint on mock built packages returns with what looks like spurious errors: rpmlint oddjob-0.21-2.i386.rpm E: oddjob executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/oddjobd W: oddjob incoherent-init-script-name oddjobd rpmlint oddjob-devel-0.21-2.i386.rpm W: oddjob-devel no-documentation rpmlint oddjob-libs-0.21-2.i386.rpm returns clean -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 16:30:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 11:30:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071630.k07GUIO3009458@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-07 11:30 EST ------- Fixed all, changed the release tag down to 1, because it doesn't exist in FE yet. 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 Jan 7 17:11:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 12:11:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177211] New: Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility 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=177211 Summary: Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/newsx.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/newsx-1.6-1.src.rpm Description: Newsx is an NNTP client that will connect to a remote NNTP server and post outgoing news articles batched by the news system (e.g. INN), as well as fetch incoming articles. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 7 17:38:14 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:38:14 -0600 Subject: packages without %description In-Reply-To: <1136647587.3111.33.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136647587.3111.33.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > How important is a for a package to have a %description field? IMO, pretty/very important. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 17:35:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 12:35:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071735.k07HZdff016975@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-07 12:35 EST ------- The spec in CVS still contains: BR: mesa-libGLw-devel Though I haven't checked (yet), I am pretty sure wine doesn't used. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 17:41:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 12:41:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177117] Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071741.k07HfQ6i017538@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-07 12:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Fixed It does not build now :/ rpmbuild does not recognize ?%doc(pl)? macro on my machine (fully updated FC4 and Rawhide box): Processing files: libtlen-0-0.1.20041113 error: File must begin with "/": %doc(pl) error: File must begin with "/": docs/AUTHORS error: File must begin with "/": docs/TODO error: File must begin with "/": ChangeLog Processing files: libtlen-devel-0-0.1.20041113 error: File must begin with "/": %doc(pl) error: File must begin with "/": docs/*.{html,css} Processing files: libtlen-debuginfo-0-0.1.20041113 Provides: libtlen.so.1.5.debug Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 RPM build errors: user dominik does not exist - using root user dominik does not exist - using root File must begin with "/": %doc(pl) File must begin with "/": docs/AUTHORS File must begin with "/": docs/TODO File must begin with "/": ChangeLog File must begin with "/": %doc(pl) File must begin with "/": docs/*.{html,css} [rpm-build at X SPECS]$ Aghh, I forgot about ChangeLog file. It has wrong encoding. It should be also fixed. > but what's the point of adding %{dist} to Release? It's not mandatory but it makes life of developer much easier (at least for me). You can have the same spec file for FC-3, FC-4 and devel branch and it makes very clear which distribution package was built for. It can also help a bit in upgrade path from FC(n) to FC(n+1). You can take a look at this thread ? http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-January/msg00334.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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 18:08:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 13:08:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177117] Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071808.k07I8J7J021380@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-07 13:08 EST ------- Doh! It should've been %lang(pl) %doc, 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 Sat Jan 7 18:14:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 13:14:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071814.k07IEr20022075@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-07 13:14 EST ------- Patch file updated as suggested. No changes to spec. GEOS has been uploaded into CVS and I'll request a build once the branches are created. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 19:13:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 14:13:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071913.k07JDLMs028462@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-07 14:13 EST ------- Thanks i make changes about /usr/include/upnp directory directory in devel package. For the RPM opt flags, i try to force it using : make CFLAGS=%optflags %{?_smp_mflags} but it fails. So i think i need to patch the makefile (also for the strip problem) and i don't know how to do that. I never make a program i only try to package some. Maybe someone can help for 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 Sat Jan 7 19:26:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 14:26:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176253] Review Request: clement-2.1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071926.k07JQUMw030641@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jmp at safe.ca 2006-01-07 14:26 EST ------- Spec File updated according comments. Firt extras package, I would like a sponsor Spec Url: ftp://ftp.safe.ca/pub/clement-2.1/SPECS/clement-2.1-57.spec SRPM Url: ftp://ftp.safe.ca/pub/clement-2.1/SRPMS/clement-2.1-57.src.rpm Changelog - Further Spec file improvement. - dispatching Clement components according 'FHS' 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 19:33:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 14:33:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173683] Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601071933.k07JXpQI031774@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173683 ------- Additional Comments From nyh at math.technion.ac.il 2006-01-07 14:33 EST ------- Thanks. I just released a new version of bidiv, which fixes a bug and the documentation, and clarifies the license (which is, and always was, the GPL - but now I also added the COPYING file and mentioned "version 2"). You can take the new version from: http://ftp.ivrix.org.il/pub/ivrix/src/cmdline/bidiv-1.5.tgz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 20:25:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:25:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176943] Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072025.k07KPd1m005312@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rootsh : Shell wrapper for auditing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176943 jspaleta at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-07 15:25 EST ------- rootsh-1.5.2-2.src.rpm 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 Sat Jan 7 20:34:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:34:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177134] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072034.k07KYcYN006259@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-07 15:34 EST ------- Legal review needed; the tarball includes some mpeg/mp3/dts/aac related code which is also built into the binaries. (In the meantime: a desktop entry for the GUI would be nice, and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS honoring by stripping hardcoded -O3, see eg. http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/mkvtoolnix-1.6.5-0.1.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 Sat Jan 7 20:39:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:39:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173683] Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072039.k07KdF3Y006762@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173683 ------- Additional Comments From danken at cs.technion.ac.il 2006-01-07 15:39 EST ------- And an updated http://ivrix.org.il/redhat/bidiv-1.5-1.src.rpm is also available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 7 21:05:00 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:05:00 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136548981.4158.272.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136547810.31699.34.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136548981.4158.272.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1136667900.2509.8.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 12:03 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 13:43 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:09 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > > > %if 0%{?variant:1} > > > > kmod_build %{variant} > > > > %else > > > > %{?kmod_build_up: kmod_build up} > > > > %{?kmod_build_smp: kmod_build smp} > > > > %{?kmod_build_xen-guest:kmod_build xen-guest} > > > > %{?kmod_build_xen-hypervisor:kmod_build xen-hypervisor} > > > > %endif > > > > > > What if you want to build for, for example, up, smp and hugemem kernels? > > > Do you have to build the same RPM twice? > > > > Actually, if you want to build _exactly_ for those three, you'd need to > > rebuild it three times (once for each like --define 'variant foo'), or > > modify the specfile, removing xen-* and adding hugemem. > > I thought I could do one pass to build for both up and smp, then another > to build the hugemem variant? Note _exactly_. The first pass will in addition to up and smp build xen-* too, so if you want to avoid that, you'll need three iterations. > Oh, you can do looping constructs in specfiles. It's just not _pretty_. > I did it once, addressing precisely this problem. I can't remember how, > but I think I'm happier that way. :). Anyway, if you find it, please post pointers. (I can imagine it being possible by doing it inside %(...) via the shell, but it _sure_ won't be anywhere near pretty for anything else but trivial things.) > What chance of extending rpm with a '%foreach'? A few years ago when I did some searching, the answer to that (IIRC) was "none". No idea if things have changed since. > Another thing which would be nice to have is a buildsystem-trigger which > automatically rebuilds the kmod package(s) when a new kernel becomes > available. I believe something like that has been planned. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Jan 7 21:19:00 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:19:00 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 13:12 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 13:50 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Panu (or everybody else of course), any idea how to implement it? I > > searched a bit for the syntax of "%foreach", but wasn't able to find > > anything. We of course could add a lot of "--with smp" "--with foo", > > put we still would have to hardcode the names :-| . > > I did tell you it wasn't pretty. > > http://david.woodhou.se/modspec.tar.gz Something like this sounds ok to me provided the helpers will find their way to eg. redhat-rpm-config and the ugliness doesn't need to be put into every kmod specfile. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Jan 7 21:31:03 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:31:03 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 16:00 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > And with the next release of Core the userland-package probably needs to > be dropped cause all parts (udev rules for example) often are a part of > core then. The question is: what obsoletes the package so it gets > removed? fedora-release? Shouldn't kmod packages should have a dependency on the userland one and it thus be pruned the usual way when old kernels get removed eg. through yum's "installonlyn" plugin? BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176257 And in case of conflicts, I think anaconda will always resolve them in favour of the new distro version. (But then again, this may be BS as I don't even remember when was the last time I've tried a distro upgrade without starting from scratch myself...) Yeah, the above don't completely eliminate the possibility of a leftover userland package hanging around and possibly causing unexpected behaviour, but I think they reduce it to a level that would be acceptable (assuming kmod packages are to the extent feasible packaged "defensively" against problems like this). From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Jan 7 21:48:53 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:48:53 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136643201.2716.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136643201.2716.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136670533.2509.43.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:13 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > Then building for all those in updates + core would be a reasonable > > compromise. > > What do others think about this compromise? Mixed feelings. On the other hand it's ok, but on the other: Let's say FC5 is released, and I have a foo module package in Extras. Time passes, FC5 kernel updates are rolled out, and foo has a new upstream version to which I need to upgrade so that it'll work with the latest FC5 updates. But it breaks with the original FC5 baseline kernel. I can easily find more productive use for my time than to try to hack the new package to work with the old kernel (which nobody should really be using anymore anyway) within one distro branch. Also, I think the binaries built for the old baseline kernel would receive _very_ little if any testing by anyone, and I thoroughly dislike the "if it builds, it should work, right?" way when talking about shipping packages to a "production" repository. From dominik at greysector.net Sat Jan 7 22:06:25 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:06:25 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136667900.2509.8.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136545746.4158.238.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136547810.31699.34.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136548981.4158.272.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136667900.2509.8.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <20060107220625.GD2626@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> On Saturday, 07 January 2006 at 22:05, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 12:03 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > Oh, you can do looping constructs in specfiles. It's just not _pretty_. > > I did it once, addressing precisely this problem. I can't remember how, > > but I think I'm happier that way. > > :). Anyway, if you find it, please post pointers. (I can imagine it > being possible by doing it inside %(...) via the shell, but it _sure_ > won't be anywhere near pretty for anything else but trivial things.) > > > What chance of extending rpm with a '%foreach'? > > A few years ago when I did some searching, the answer to that (IIRC) was > "none". No idea if things have changed since. Actually, I've seen Jeff and others discussing exactly this issue on IRC. Jeff said something about using make instead of shell as the build script interpreter. Regards, R. -- APT/YUM RPM repository for Fedora Core http://rpm.greysector.net/ mpg321, xmp, faad2, lame, mad, *mplayer*, rdesktop, tin, xvid, mks, mutt "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 7 22:18:15 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:18:15 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:30:42 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Where is the part you find "somehow contradicting"? In all three quotes, > > using %{?dist} is either recommended or described as being optional. > > This dist tag macro exists in order to aid you. "recommended" is not > > equal to "mandatory". > > I'm not talking about mandatory. I'm talking about the difference > between "optional", as in "use it if you think you should", and > "recommended", as in "use it if you are not sure you may need it or > not". [X] It is optional. [ ] It is mandatory. [X] You are free to use it if you like it or if it helps you. [X] It is considered helpful and useful by some packagers. [X] Some packagers use it and recommend using it. [X] If you have doubts that you need it, you need not use it. Shall I go on? I still fail to see where you see a contradiction. > In some cases, when the packager has no strong feeling either way and he > is tempted to not use it to avoid making the tag more complex, should he > use it or not? For an example, see: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 > where if I add the tag, the version will be something like > "2.0-0.1.20060103cvs.fc4", which I call ugly. Answer this question: If you want to release the same package for FC3, FC4 and FC5, what package revisions would you give your three packages and future updates? From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 7 22:18:25 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:18:25 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136649713.3111.46.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649713.3111.46.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <20060107231825.660bdbf9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:31:53 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > (Btw, for distribution upgrades, which don't perform an online upgrade of > > Fedora Extras packages prior to first boot, using %{dist} is insufficent. > > [Same applies to CD based distribution upgrades. Any Fedora Extras update > > package for the older distribution version may be seen as newer than a CD > > snapshot copy of a Fedora Extras package for the newer distribution, e.g. > > 4.fc3 > 1.fc4, so while %{dist} is helpful for our current Fedora Extras > > online repository, it is not a silver bullet.]) > > Why not use fc3.4 and fc4.1 then? ;) Because it would create real mess. It would make the dist tag be the most-significant portion of the package revision number. Have fun with versioned dependencies (!), versioned obsoletes and friends. It would also lead to comparing numbers to letters, distribution version versus package revision. E.g. 1 > fc3. In particular, there's no return once you increased release beyond 'f', which would happen for ever user who rebuilds a src.rpm without having %{?dist} defined. Only increasing %version or %epoch would be a way out. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 7 22:16:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:16:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177134] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072216.k07MGQt9017204@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 rpm at greysector.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-07 17:16 EST ------- It doesn't decode video or audio, just demuxes and remuxes it into mkv. I hope it's allright. Both your suggestions are now included. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 22:29:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:29:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177166] Review Request: perl-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072229.k07MTNlU018301@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177166 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ville.skytta at iki.fi OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-07 17:29 EST ------- Approved, with a few notes for consideration: - Trim down %description, the first paragraph should be fine. - Make sure that the bundled bzip2 source will never be used, by rm -rf'ing bzlib-src in %prep or something like that. - Include ANNOUNCE in %docs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 7 23:59:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 18:59:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171526] Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601072359.k07NxtD4028576@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine - A Windows 16/32 bit emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171526 andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-07 18:59 EST ------- Thanks to all the people here wine is built for fc3 and fc4 and now also for devel. I will close this bug in the hope that more work and integration will be discussed in other wine bugs along the way. Thank you all very much. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 00:13:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 19:13:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177232] New: Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives 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=177232 Summary: Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/regionset.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/regionset-0.1-1.src.rpm Description: regionset will show you the current region code of the drive, how often it has been changed and how many changes are left. If there are any changes left, it asks for the new region code (see table 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 Jan 8 00:57:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 19:57:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177235] New: Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files 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=177235 Summary: Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/sysconftool.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/sysconftool-0.15-1.src.rpm Description: sysconftool is a development utility that helps to install application configuration files. sysconftool allows an existing application to be upgraded without losing the older version's configuration settings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From li_007g at hotmail.com Sun Jan 8 01:59:10 2006 From: li_007g at hotmail.com (nadeem LION) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 01:59:10 +0000 Subject: Required information Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Jan 8 02:43:52 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 03:43:52 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136670533.2509.43.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136643201.2716.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136670533.2509.43.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136688232.22479.146.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:48 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:13 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > > > Then building for all those in updates + core would be a reasonable > > > compromise. > > > > What do others think about this compromise? > > Mixed feelings. You have no choice. The current behavior renders "yum update" unusable for *all end users* using kernel-modules, and forces *all* those *end users* to rebuild the kernel-modules. This is not a problem for me, but this can not be acceptable for "ordinary end users". > On the other hand it's ok, but on the other: > Let's say FC5 is released, and I have a foo module package in Extras. > Time passes, FC5 kernel updates are rolled out, and foo has a new > upstream version to which I need to upgrade so that it'll work with the > latest FC5 updates. But it breaks with the original FC5 baseline > kernel. I can easily find more productive use for my time than to try > to hack the new package to work with the old kernel (which nobody should > really be using anymore anyway) within one distro branch. > > Also, I think the binaries built for the old baseline kernel would > receive _very_ little if any testing by anyone, and I thoroughly dislike > the "if it builds, it should work, right?" way when talking about > shipping packages to a "production" repository. Agreed, but ... end user must be provided with a kernel-module matching their currently running kernel, otherwise "yum update" will always fail. This will cause these end users to look out for alternatives (proprietary installers, other 3rd parties etc.) and in the end probably could cause them to switch away from Fedora. Ralf From mpeters at mac.com Sun Jan 8 03:33:45 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:33:45 -0800 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 19:30 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:38 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Where is the part you find "somehow contradicting"? In all three quotes, > > using %{?dist} is either recommended or described as being optional. > > This dist tag macro exists in order to aid you. "recommended" is not > > equal to "mandatory". > > I'm not talking about mandatory. I'm talking about the difference > between "optional", as in "use it if you think you should", and > "recommended", as in "use it if you are not sure you may need it or > not". > > In some cases, when the packager has no strong feeling either way and he > is tempted to not use it to avoid making the tag more complex, should he > use it or not? For an example, see: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 > where if I add the tag, the version will be something like > "2.0-0.1.20060103cvs.fc4", which I call ugly. When I package development snapshots - I like to do 0%{?dist}.n.%{cvs_release} where n is an integer number. I increment the n with every spec file (in case I need to change to an older checkout) - and when a final release is made, everything after %{?dist} is dropped - and the 0 I bump to a 1. See http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.spec I don't know that that is the best way to do it - but it works well for me. From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Sun Jan 8 07:21:42 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:21:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sat, 7 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 02:31 -0800 schrieb Panu Matilainen: >> On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> >>>> We can also try to special-case the up/smp/hugemem thing if it's a pain >>>> to do %foreach in the specfile. >>> >>> Is there any example how "%foreach" works? >>> >>> I still hope we can get the hardcoded variants up/smp/hugemem/xen-foo >>> somehow out of the spec file and passed as define by the buildsys to >>> rpmbuild, too. >> >> Yes, please. The up/smp/blaa needs to go away from the spec, it's just >> hideous. My humble 5 cents :) > > Panu (or everybody else of course), any idea how to implement it? I > searched a bit for the syntax of "%foreach", but wasn't able to find > anything. We of course could add a lot of "--with smp" "--with foo", put > we still would have to hardcode the names :-| . I was thinking of putting the looping into buildsys for known kernel variants, basically the equivalent of for variant in ; do rpmbuild -bb --define "variant $variant" kmod.spec done ...and the spec would only have kmod_prep %{variant} kmod_build %{variant} ...etc. But then I wonder do we really want all variants of all modules - for example does SMP Thinkpad-modules make sense (does it even build/work at all)? That would require the information of what variants to build for each kmod to be stored *somewhere* (outside the spec presumably) which makes the whole thing kinda moot I guess. So, taking back the "must go", I can live with the proposal. :) P.S. There *is* a yum plugin for automatically updating livna-style kernel module packages along with the kernel in yum-utils cvs, just haven't bothered advertising it too much as it's been clear for quite some time that FE kernel modules are going to be something completely different. - Panu - From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 07:24:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 02:24:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177247] New: Review Request: jthread 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=177247 Summary: Review Request: jthread Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/jthread-1.1.2-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/jthread-1.1.2-1.src.rpm Description: JThread provides some classes to make use of threads easy on different platforms. The classes are actually rather simple wrappers around existing thread implementations. This is a dependency of JRTPLIB. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 07:37:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 02:37:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174898] Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080737.k087bqTd006695@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 mpeters at mac.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-08 02:37 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 Sun Jan 8 07:42:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 02:42:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177249] New: Review Request: jrtplib 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=177249 Summary: Review Request: jrtplib Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/jrtplib-3.3.0-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/jrtplib-3.3.0-1.src.rpm Description: JRTPLIB is an object-oriented RTP library written in C++. It was first developed at the School for Knowledge Technology (or 'School voor Kennistechnologie' in Dutch), a cooperation between the Hasselt University) and the Maastricht University. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 08:23:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 03:23:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080823.k088NA6i011952@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-08 03:22 EST ------- I tryed 0.5.1 on my x86_64 box. (with the selinux patch) It loaded the policy successfully but it hangs after readahead (does not know if this is related to selinux) or if it is a bug in 0.5.1. Can somebody try 0.5.1 (with the patch) and see if it works for him? Note: you will need libsepol-devel and libselinux-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 Sun Jan 8 08:28:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 03:28:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080828.k088SNuD012396@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-08 03:28 EST ------- (In reply to comment #163) > I tryed 0.5.1 on my x86_64 box. (with the selinux patch) me too without the selinux patch > It loaded the policy successfully but it hangs after readahead (does not know if > this is related to selinux) or if it is a bug in 0.5.1. did you try 0.5.1 without the patch? do you use lvm? did it work? > Can somebody try 0.5.1 (with the patch) and see if it works for him? > Note: you will need libsepol-devel and libselinux-devel well if the system would boot for me with x86_64 rawhide id try the patch right 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 Jan 8 08:34:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 03:34:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080834.k088YjuA013032@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-08 03:34 EST ------- (In reply to comment #164) > (In reply to comment #163) > > I tryed 0.5.1 on my x86_64 box. (with the selinux patch) > me too without the selinux patch > > > It loaded the policy successfully but it hangs after readahead (does not know if > > this is related to selinux) or if it is a bug in 0.5.1. > did you try 0.5.1 without the patch? do you use lvm? did it work? > not yet but will do it (no lvm here) does your system boot without the patch? > > Can somebody try 0.5.1 (with the patch) and see if it works for him? > > Note: you will need libsepol-devel and libselinux-devel > well if the system would boot for me with x86_64 rawhide id try the patch right > now ;) > I am building the rpm on my rawhide (i386) box now. will see if it is a x86_64 issues or not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 09:19:51 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:49:51 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136711991.3108.10.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 19:33 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > When I package development snapshots - I like to do > > 0%{?dist}.n.%{cvs_release} > > where n is an integer number. > > I increment the n with every spec file (in case I need to change to an > older checkout) - and when a final release is made, everything after > %{?dist} is dropped - and the 0 I bump to a 1. > > See http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.spec > > I don't know that that is the best way to do it - but it works well for > me. >From what I deduce from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines , everyone should do the same, except that one should use a different format: 0.n.%{cvs_release}%{?dist} Do you have any specific reason to put %{dist} before the number? If yes, perhaps the recommendations should be changed. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 09:16:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 04:16:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080916.k089Gxle016758@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-08 04:16 EST ------- tryed i386 rawhide no. It failed to boot because it was unable to read /proc booted with enforcing=0 and it booted. only this avc message has to be fixed to get selinux working: audit(1136711719.772:2): avc: denied { read } for pid=1 comm="initng" name="stat" dev=proc ino=17367054 scontext=system_u:system_r:kernel_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:system_r:udev_t:s0-s0:c0.c255 tclass=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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 09:26:28 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:56:28 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Shall I go on? I still fail to see where you see a contradiction. Perhaps it's just my bad English and the way different people think about "contradiction". From what I'm getting here, it seems that the disttag is really recommended. So I guess we should mention that it's recommended in all pages it's discussed. > Answer this question: If you want to release the same package for FC3, FC4 > and FC5, what package revisions would you give your three packages and > future updates? After all I found here, I guess I'll not use it for things like font packages, where the dependencies aren't really there and people can keep using the old version when they upgrade, but I'll use it when the dependencies somehow depend on the version of Core. I guess I'll examine the final RPM carefully for the exact dependencies to make sure I don't miss details. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 09:25:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 04:25:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080925.k089PxaY026283@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-08 04:25 EST ------- it hangs on shutdown on my i386 box too, same issue as comment #131 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 09:32:27 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:02:27 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136712747.3108.24.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:56 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Shall I go on? I still fail to see where you see a contradiction. > > Perhaps it's just my bad English and the way different people think > about "contradiction". Okay, I guess I now found it. It's perhaps my experience with standards. In the standards world, there is this thing called RFC 2119 (and similar documents), which defines "SHOULD" and "RECOMMENDED" to be different from "MAY" and "OPTIONAL". The RFC can be found here: http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.html SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. MAY This word, or the adjective "OPTIONAL", mean that an item is truly optional. One vendor may choose to include the item because a particular marketplace requires it or because the vendor feels that it enhances the product while another vendor may omit the same item. [...] That's all that's confusing. roozbeh From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 09:34:20 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:04:20 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <20060107231825.660bdbf9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649713.3111.46.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231825.660bdbf9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136712860.3108.27.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Why not use fc3.4 and fc4.1 then? ;) > > Because it would create real mess. [...] It was a joke, of course. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 09:59:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 04:59:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601080959.k089xBA6030250@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-08 04:59 EST ------- updated svn co http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite-2.0.0-0.12.svn110.src.rpm http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.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 Sun Jan 8 10:07:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:07:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176434] Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081007.k08A7abM031191@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-08 05:07 EST ------- Updated version, now using the %{?dist} tag: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl-1.9-1.4.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 Jan 8 10:08:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177096] Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081008.k08A85Hx031241@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-08 05:07 EST ------- Updated version, now using the %{?dist} tag: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/fonttools.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/fonttools-2.0-0.2.20060103cvs.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 Jan 8 10:09:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:09:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177204] Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081009.k08A91KH031338@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177204 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-08 05:08 EST ------- Updated version, now using the %{?dist} tag: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit-0.8-0.2.rc5.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 Jan 8 10:17:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:17:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081017.k08AHcgd032172@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-08 05:17 EST ------- As far as I can tell from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines, the release macros should use a format like the following, instead of what you are currently using: %define svn_date 2006MMDD (replace MMDD with real dates) %define alphatag 11.%{svn_rev}svn and then, from what I deduce from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag, the release tag itself should be like this: Release: 0.%{alphatag}%{?dist} -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 8 10:26:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:26:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060108102617.C74B58012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 19 abiword-2.4.2-1.fc3 lincity-ng-1.0.2-1.fc3 lincity-ng-1.0.2-2.fc3 logjam-4.5.2-1.fc3 maxima-5.9.2-9.fc3 nethack-vultures-1.11.2-1.fc3 openvpn-2.0.5-3.fc3 perl-CGI-Untaint-1.26-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-AsForm-2.42-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.02-1.fc3 perl-Clone-0.18-2.fc3 perl-DBIx-ContextualFetch-1.03-1.fc3 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.20-1.fc3 perl-String-CRC32-1.3-1.fc3 perl-Text-Diff-0.35-2.fc3 streamtuner-0.99.99-9.fc3 swatch-3.1.1-4.fc3 wine-0.9.5-1.fc3 wine-0.9.5-2.fc3 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 Sun Jan 8 10:41:49 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:41:49 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:21 -0800, Panu Matilainen wrote: > I was thinking of putting the looping into buildsys for known kernel > variants, basically the equivalent of > for variant in ; do > rpmbuild -bb --define "variant $variant" kmod.spec > done Yes, that'd be doable too and this is basically how it was planned in many early proposals, but there were pretty strong opinions towards "build for all variants in one rpmbuild invocation", so that strategy was adopted. In particular, building for all variants in one pass decreases the number of produced source rpms to one per arch for a given kernel. There were probably some other benefits too, but I don't remember more details now. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 8 10:44:36 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:44:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060108104436.EB4128012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 26 abiword-2.4.2-1.fc4 gazpacho-0.6.3-1.fc4 gift-0.11.8.1-4.fc4 glabels-2.0.4-1.fc4 lincity-ng-1.0.2-1.fc4 lincity-ng-1.0.2-2.fc4 logjam-4.5.2-1.fc4 maxima-5.9.2-9.fc4 monotone-0.25-2.fc4 obby-0.3.0-2.fc4 openvpn-2.0.5-3.fc4 perl-Apache-Session-Wrapper-0.26-1.fc4 perl-CGI-Untaint-1.26-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-AsForm-2.42-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.02-1.fc4 perl-Clone-0.18-2.fc4 perl-DBIx-ContextualFetch-1.03-1.fc4 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.20-1.fc4 perl-String-CRC32-1.3-1.fc4 perl-Text-CSV_XS-0.23-2.fc4 perl-Text-Diff-0.35-2.fc4 streamtuner-0.99.99-8.fc4 streamtuner-0.99.99-9.fc4 swatch-3.1.1-4.fc4 wine-0.9.5-1.fc4 wine-0.9.5-2.fc4 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 Sun Jan 8 10:51:16 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:51:16 +0200 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136711991.3108.10.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136711991.3108.10.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136717476.4330.58.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:49 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 19:33 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > > When I package development snapshots - I like to do > > > > 0%{?dist}.n.%{cvs_release} > > > > where n is an integer number. > > > > I increment the n with every spec file (in case I need to change to an > > older checkout) - and when a final release is made, everything after > > %{?dist} is dropped - and the 0 I bump to a 1. > > > > See http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.spec > > > > I don't know that that is the best way to do it - but it works well for > > me. > > >From what I deduce from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag and > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines , everyone should > do the same, except that one should use a different format: > > 0.n.%{cvs_release}%{?dist} > > Do you have any specific reason to put %{dist} before the number? If > yes, perhaps the recommendations should be changed. That will not behave as expected with distro upgrades. Any snapshot built for eg. FC-4 would be always treated as newer than any snapshot for FC-3, regardless of the snapshot date or the value of "n". On the other hand, the newest package version for the newer distro shouldn't really be older than the newest for the old one anyway. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 10:50:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 05:50:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081050.k08AoVNV004215@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-08 05:50 EST ------- Joost, do you have a sponsor and an Extras account already? If yes, the package was already approved in comment 26 and you can go ahead and import 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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 8 11:01:31 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 06:01:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060108110131.51DE18012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 34 akode-2.0-1.fc5 apcupsd-3.12.0-1.fc5 baobab-2.3.0-2.fc5 comical-0.7-1.fc5 compat-wxGTK-2.4.2-16.fc5 gazpacho-0.6.3-1.fc5 gdesklets-0.35.2-26.fc5 gift-0.11.8.1-4.fc5 glabels-2.0.4-1.fc5 inkscape-0.43-1.fc5 ldns-1.0.1-1.fc5 lincity-ng-1.0.2-2.fc5 maxima-5.9.2-9.fc5 monotone-0.25-2.fc5 perl-Apache-Session-Wrapper-0.26-1.fc5 perl-CGI-Untaint-1.26-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-AsForm-2.42-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.02-1.fc5 perl-Clone-0.18-2.fc5 perl-DBIx-ContextualFetch-1.03-1.fc5 perl-MailTools-1.71-1.fc5 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.20-1.fc5 perl-Text-CSV_XS-0.23-2.fc5 perl-Text-Diff-0.35-2.fc5 python-basemap-data-0.7-1 scim-input-pad-0.1.1-1.fc5 scim-skk-0.5.1-1.fc5 scim-tables-0.5.4-3.fc5 streamtuner-0.99.99-9.fc5 svgalib-1.9.24-1 swatch-3.1.1-4.fc5 wine-0.9.5-1.fc5 wine-0.9.5-2.fc5 yumex-0.45-2.0.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 Sun Jan 8 11:19:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 06:19:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081119.k08BJxG4008959@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-08 06:19 EST ------- Doing the manpage charset conversion in %install will break --short-circuit builds as the pages will be converted more than one time. Moving that to %prep fixes it. Relying on docbook-style-xsl to pull in sgmlnorm is fragile. sgmlnorm has been moved to the new opensp package in Rawhide and docbook-style-xsl doesn't really require either openjade or opensp; it's more like an implementation glitch in the current docbook-dtds package. Requires: /usr/bin/sgmlnorm would make this more robust. No need to define python_sitelib at top of specfile, it's not used. To enable the test suite, add BuildRequires: python-logilab-common and after %install: %check cd test PYTHONPATH=$(ls -1d $PWD/../build/lib.*) %{__python} runtests.py -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 11:42:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 06:42:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081142.k08Bgwwr011780@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-08 06:42 EST ------- I don't use YYYYMMDD (I did initially) because the svn release is a lot more accurate. The reviewer can do an svn co of the exact svn co used in the src.rpm and thus can check against upstream with a diff. It's also easier to report bugs upstream if the svn co revision is known. I have no problem moving the svn to after the %{svn_rev} though. With respect to placement of the dist tag - in this case it probably doesn't matter because this package will not build on FC4 (dependencies not met), but if the dist tag is before the alphatag - a build for an older distro won't ever look newer to rpm. This could potentially be a problem if a newer svn release fails to build in a newer core release, and the user upgrades. Having the %{?dist} tag before the %{alphatag} means that yum would still upgrade the package, even though the %{alphatag} was older, thus ensuring the user has a package built against the right libraries. That's my reasoning anyway. Again, it doesn't really matter that much for this package since it requires rawhide anyway (due to fontconfig version). There's also precedent for putting stuff after %{?dist} foobar-3.fc3 foobar-3.fc4 foobar-3.fc5 Bug report for foobar in fc3 - bug does not affect fc4/fc5 When fixing the fc-3 issue, you would out a .1 - making it foobar-3.fc3.1 so that you don't need to push useless updates in fc4/fc5 Essenstially that's what I'm doing - it's foobar-0.%{?dist} and the %{alphatag} is equivalent to the .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 Sun Jan 8 11:57:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 06:57:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081157.k08BvTNv013937@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ivazquez at ivazquez.net OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-08 06:57 EST ------- - Builds fine in FC4 mock - Upstream source matches - rpmlint output: W: php-pear-DB invalid-license The PHP License - ignorable, rpmlint problem E: php-pear-DB non-executable-script /usr/share/pear/tests/DB/tests/run.cvs 0644 E: php-pear-DB non-executable-script /usr/share/pear/tests/DB/tests/driver/run.cvs 0644 - ignorable; they aren't meant to actually be run per se AFAIK W: php-pear-DB dangerous-command-in-%post install - bogus, but add pear to Requires(post) and Requires(postun) - The rest looks good The Requires(post{,un}) change can easily enough be made in CVS. 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 mpeters at mac.com Sun Jan 8 12:01:31 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 04:01:31 -0800 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:56 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Shall I go on? I still fail to see where you see a contradiction. > > Perhaps it's just my bad English and the way different people think > about "contradiction". From what I'm getting here, it seems that the > disttag is really recommended. So I guess we should mention that it's > recommended in all pages it's discussed. > > > Answer this question: If you want to release the same package for FC3, FC4 > > and FC5, what package revisions would you give your three packages and > > future updates? > > After all I found here, I guess I'll not use it for things like font > packages, where the dependencies aren't really there and people can keep > using the old version when they upgrade They can't always. Fonts for fc-3/fc-4 use fonts.cache-1 In fc5 - a fonts.cache-2 file is used. While the fonts would continue to work, un-installing would be dirty unless fonts.cache-2 was ghosted in the fc3/fc4 package, which it may not have been. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 12:10:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:10:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081210.k08CAjkV015201@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-08 07:10 EST ------- Shouldn't the .so files be in the default library search path (i.e. in /usr/lib) rather than in /usr/lib/itcl3.2 or /usr/lib/itk3.2, respectively? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Jan 8 12:15:07 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:15:07 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136722507.8505.14.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 08 janvier 2006 ? 04:01 -0800, Michael A. Peters a ?crit : > They can't always. > Fonts for fc-3/fc-4 use fonts.cache-1 > > In fc5 - a fonts.cache-2 file is used. > While the fonts would continue to work, un-installing would be dirty > unless fonts.cache-2 was ghosted in the fc3/fc4 package, which it may > not have been. For my font pack I ghost it everywhere, since I don't feel it's worth maintaining two spec file branches just for a ghosted file. 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 robilad at kaffe.org Sun Jan 8 11:33:25 2006 From: robilad at kaffe.org (Dalibor Topic) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 11:33:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Java status (was: Re: Wine c.f. Mono) References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk><43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk> <43B7F9EE.2060501@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: Linus Walleij writes: > > On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Andy Burns wrote: > > >> Is Java encumbered by patents, really? Isn't it just the copyrighted > >> reference implementation and testsuite that is the crux? > > > > You're right, I've never heard of Sun making any threats about 3rd party > > implementation, just binary distribution and limitations on source access. > > While we're talking about it, does anyone know: > > As far as I understood, IBM (and others) approached Sun to have them Open > Source their reference implementation of Java. The answer was "no", to > which IBM et al responded by throwing developers at libgcj, classpath and > friends so they really started to catch up. > > Was this how the rapid development of libgcj and friends came about or was > it a "natural process" i.e som critical momentum or so? > It was the latter. Lots of contributions from a variety of volunteers, researchers and companies, and growing grass roots support. 2006 is going to be a fun year. cheers, dalibor topic From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 12:21:57 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 15:51:57 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136722917.3108.35.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 04:01 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:56 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > > After all I found here, I guess I'll not use it for things like font > > packages, where the dependencies aren't really there and people can keep > > using the old version when they upgrade > > They can't always. > Fonts for fc-3/fc-4 use fonts.cache-1 > > In fc5 - a fonts.cache-2 file is used. > While the fonts would continue to work, un-installing would be dirty > unless fonts.cache-2 was ghosted in the fc3/fc4 package, which it may > not have been. So, should we try and make a list of situation where %{?dist} is not really needed (so we can recommend it in other cases)? There is already one candidate: a font package in which fonts.cache-2 is ghosted in the FC3/4 package. roozbeh From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 8 12:22:48 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:22:48 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136688232.22479.146.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136567041.22479.2.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136567826.3146.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136615137.22479.109.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136640040.2716.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136641766.22479.123.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136643201.2716.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136670533.2509.43.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136688232.22479.146.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136722968.2665.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 08.01.2006, 03:43 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:48 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:13 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > > > Then building for all those in updates + core would be a reasonable > > > > compromise. > > > What do others think about this compromise? > > Mixed feelings. > You have no choice. > The current behavior [...] We're not taking about the current behavior here. There is not even a current behavior for Fedora Extras. If you have problems with the old fedora.us standard that is still used by livna discuss it on the livna mailinglist or in a separate thread to avoid confusion. > > On the other hand it's ok, but on the other: > > Let's say FC5 is released, and I have a foo module package in Extras. > > Time passes, FC5 kernel updates are rolled out, and foo has a new > > upstream version to which I need to upgrade so that it'll work with the > > latest FC5 updates. But it breaks with the original FC5 baseline > > kernel. I can easily find more productive use for my time than to try > > to hack the new package to work with the old kernel (which nobody should > > really be using anymore anyway) within one distro branch. > > > > Also, I think the binaries built for the old baseline kernel would > > receive _very_ little if any testing by anyone, and I thoroughly dislike > > the "if it builds, it should work, right?" way when talking about > > shipping packages to a "production" repository. > Agreed, but ... end user must be provided with a kernel-module matching > their currently running kernel, otherwise "yum update" will always fail. No, "yum update" with the new standard won't fail afaics. But maybe I'm overlooked something -- please show me the details where yum will fail and I'm happy to admit that I was wrong. Otherwise: Please stop spreading FUD, thanks. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From mpeters at mac.com Sun Jan 8 12:33:00 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 04:33:00 -0800 Subject: svn snapshot packages Message-ID: <1136723580.28835.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Would just like some clarification. In the wiki - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines If a snapshot package is considered a "pre-release package", you should follow the guidelines listed in Pre-Release Packages, and use an %{alphatag} in the following format: YYYYMMDDcvs Where YYYY is the digits for the year, MM is the zero-padded digits for the month, DD is the zero-padded digits for the day, and "cvs" is the type of checkout. The date in reference is the date that the checkout was taken. -=- With svn checkouts, is it OK to use the svn revision instead of YYYYMMDD ? It is more precise imho as it specifies exactly the upstream revision used (as there may be more than one revision on any given YYYYMMDD) Secondly - if it is OK to use the svn revision, is it OK to put the svn before the revision? svn99 vs svn101 I think is cleaner than 99svn vs 101svn But I'm flexible. -=- Related %{?dist} question - pre-release snapshot packages always need to have an initial number of 0 so that when final release is made, it can be bumped to 1 (as explained in the wiki) I prefer to put the %{?dist} after the 0 before the %{alphatag} because it guarantees that when upgrading distro, the package built against the newer distro will look newer to yum. This normally would not be an issue, but it might be if new code in the svn tree builds fine against one compiler but doesn't against newer compiler in newer distro. Rare case, sure, but ... project developers aren't always working with bleeding edge compilers (which rawhide often uses). Thoughts appreciated. From fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk Sun Jan 8 12:39:29 2006 From: fedora-extras at adslpipe.co.uk (Andy Burns) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 12:39:29 +0000 Subject: Java status In-Reply-To: References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk><43B71CE1.1000201@adslpipe.co.uk><43B7F9EE.2060501@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: <43C10801.6020309@adslpipe.co.uk> Dalibor Topic wrote: > Lots of contributions from a variety of volunteers, > researchers and companies Eclipse and tomcat were significant milestones for gcj, unfortunately it won't handle netbeans/limewire/azureus yet (though the latter seems close) > 2006 is going to be a fun year. From my watching eye on the various java planets, I think you're right, will Sun live to regret not opening up? From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 12:51:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081251.k08CpKax019603@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From Nicolas.Mailhot at laPoste.net 2006-01-08 07:51 EST ------- A new perl-Net-Server will be pushed to FE soonish. Please test -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 12:57:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:57:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081257.k08Cv1Kf020175@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-08 07:56 EST ------- after commenting out the fsck part of mountroot.i i was able to boot on x86_64 rawhide (lvm). fsck there doesent even start... maybe devices missing too? activating swap fails (/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01 doesent get created) udevd event complains for failed to execute: /lib/udev/floppysomething.sh when initng is not started in --verbose mode (reproduced that various times). shutdown also not complete on x86_64 rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 12:58:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 07:58:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081258.k08Cw9nj020362@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-08 07:57 EST ------- (In reply to comment #157) > but don't think everybody lost interest > in initng because they were busy playing with their new Christmas toys :) Oh. That's just plain unfair. I didn't get any fun new toys this christmas! Hmmmm... Right now I feel that I agree with those that doesn't think it's stable enough yet. Took me over two hours of hard work before my home computer booted using 0.5.1 (upgrading it from 0.4.8). Guess I'll have to fill in quite a heap of bug reports. One thing maybe someone here can answer: system/usb chokes on the line " for i in `/bin/grep "driver: .*-hcd"|cut -d" " -f2 /etc/sysconfig/hwconf`". Tried executing the grep in a terminal manually, which gave me loads of non relevant stuff and then just stopped. I'm no bash expert so I don't know what happens, anyone else? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 8 13:07:15 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 14:07:15 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <43C10E83.6020909@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > What happens if a driver gets merged into the kernel upstream? Or if > davej et. al decide to put it in the Core kernel package for one reason > or another? Will the Core kernel package now have to have a > Provides/Obsoletes: kmod-%{name} ? > Ok, maybe I am crazy and there are n+1 good,sane, and intelligent reasons against this but: Why not extend rpm similar to perl? Have the kernel rpm generate a list of provides with the module names and the module version and the kernel version? Even something like static/module could be part of this information. That would be a cleaner solution for the deps and easier for the requires of the userland tools. kernel-modules could then have the same provides etc. I know what this implies but kernel modules that are not part of the upstream kernel are indeed a special case and why not treat them like that? I really do appreciate all the work that has been put into this issue but maybe it is time for a more radical view on this. Changing yum and friends to compensate for the issue that there only is so much you can do with E-V-R and Requires/Obsoletes etc. may not prove to be the best way. When I see how many issues pop up and even in the lead mail to this thread that not everybody even from FESCo is happy with the current proposal that really gets me thinking. I agree that we should find a solution as quick as possible to present something by the time fc5 is released but maybe this is something that could be considered in the fc6 timeframe? Ok, most people probably won't like this idea and this is why I will shut up now and keep quiet as usual ;) - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDwQ6DQEQyPsWM8csRAhkwAKCVLY755HFTY92I7oIO/aIpLt/GcACfXkL7 Ddpl4MAbPrYFdjATK/sPDag= =7+rI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 13:12:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 08:12:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081312.k08DCsLq021853@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-08 08:12 EST ------- Thanks It builds and works fine! New version : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp-1.2.1a-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 Jan 8 13:18:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 08:18:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081318.k08DIvHg022498@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-08 08:18 EST ------- (In reply to comment #167) > it hangs on shutdown on my i386 box too, > same issue as comment #131 I've noticed that if there are services/daemons doesn't start up correctly (i e they're in the state FAILED_STARTING) shutting down doesn't work properly. Can you try zapping (ngc -z) all services that doesn't start properly and then reboot? It might at least work rebooting, and if it does we've got enough on our feet to start grumping about 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 Jan 8 14:05:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 09:05:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081405.k08E5rxO028413@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-08 09:05 EST ------- - Are the items in %{_libdir}/4Suite/profiles of any use? - Consider running %{_libdir}/4Suite/tests/test.py in %check -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 14:30:25 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 14:30:25 +0000 Subject: rpms/perl-Net-Server/devel .cvsignore, 1.3, 1.4 perl-Net-Server.spec, 1.9, 1.10 sources, 1.3, 1.4 In-Reply-To: <200601081253.k08CrBsO010373@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601081253.k08CrBsO010373@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1136730625.28374.72.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 07:52 -0500, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > +# IO::Multiplex support is optional, but since it's in FE and not including it > +# causes build problems in some packages... > +Requires: perl(IO::Multiplex) If perl(IO::Multiplex) is optional for perl-Net-Server but required for some other package, why isn't the fix to add perl(IO::Multiplex) as a buildreq/req for the other package? That way, anyone using perl-Net-Server but not needing perl(IO::Multiplex) doesn't need to install it. Paul. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 8 14:54:28 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 15:54:28 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136712747.3108.24.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136712747.3108.24.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <20060108155428.2f163c46.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:02:27 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:56 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 23:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > Shall I go on? I still fail to see where you see a contradiction. > > > > Perhaps it's just my bad English and the way different people think > > about "contradiction". > > Okay, I guess I now found it. It's perhaps my experience with standards. > In the standards world, there is this thing called RFC 2119 (and similar > documents), which defines "SHOULD" and "RECOMMENDED" to be different > from "MAY" and "OPTIONAL". The RFC can be found here: > > http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.html > > SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there > may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a > particular item, but the full implications must be understood > and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. > > MAY This word, or the adjective "OPTIONAL", mean that an item is > truly optional. One vendor may choose to include the item > because a particular marketplace requires it or because the > vendor feels that it enhances the product while another vendor > may omit the same item. [...] > > That's all that's confusing. Well, conclusively %{?dist} is an optional macro which is recommended by its lobbyists. ;-P This is splitting-hairs. I believe the terminology in RFCs is defined more strictly in order to avoid interoperability problems of different implementations. %{?dist}, being the least-significant portion of a package EVR number, is not so important. For all those packagers, who use or prefer a different release versioning scheme, it is truely optional. Whether carefully weighing the implications of using it or not using it is required, I don't know. It doesn't add a lot of complicated magic. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Sun Jan 8 15:08:26 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 15:08:26 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136732906.30348.86.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:41 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > In particular, building for all variants in one pass decreases the > number of produced source rpms to one per arch for a given kernel. Er, why can't we decrease the number of source RPMS to _one_? -- dwmw2 From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 8 15:19:16 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:19:16 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136732906.30348.86.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136732906.30348.86.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1136733556.2665.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 08.01.2006, 15:08 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:41 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > In particular, building for all variants in one pass decreases the > > number of produced source rpms to one per arch for a given kernel. > > Er, why can't we decrease the number of source RPMS to _one_? The buildsys might build multiple SRPMs -- but that's true for other packages, too. We'll only ship one SRPM for a kernel-module per kernel. Only one SRPM per kernel-module is not possible because we wouldn't get proper debug-rpms otherwise. Cu thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 8 15:30:08 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 16:30:08 +0100 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136691226.2899.59.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060108163008.46459d5d.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 19:33:45 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > When I package development snapshots - I like to do > > 0%{?dist}.n.%{cvs_release} > > where n is an integer number. > > I increment the n with every spec file (in case I need to change to an > older checkout) - and when a final release is made, everything after > %{?dist} is dropped - and the 0 I bump to a 1. > > See http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.spec > > I don't know that that is the best way to do it - but it works well for > me. Move the dist tag to the very right, where it doesn't compete with ordinary release numbers. You are mixing different concepts here. The "0." prefix shall be enough for any pre-release version to be seen as older than the final release '1'. A user, who would rebuild your package from source would/might end up without the dist tag near the front. The rebuilt package would be seen as newer than all your snapshots. From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Sun Jan 8 15:34:14 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 10:34:14 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136733556.2665.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136732906.30348.86.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136733556.2665.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136734454.5036.21.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 16:19 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 08.01.2006, 15:08 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > > Er, why can't we decrease the number of source RPMS to _one_? > Only one SRPM per kernel-module is not possible because we wouldn't get > proper debug-rpms otherwise. Well, you can, but it's *VERY* ugly... http://fedora.ivazquez.net/yum/4/i386/SRPMS.ivazquez/kernel-module-zd1211-0.0-0.iva.1.r48.src.rpm -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Jan 8 15:38:40 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:38:40 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-Net-Server/devel .cvsignore, 1.3, 1.4 perl-Net-Server.spec, 1.9, 1.10 sources, 1.3, 1.4 In-Reply-To: <1136730625.28374.72.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <200601081253.k08CrBsO010373@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1136730625.28374.72.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1136734720.8505.35.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 08 janvier 2006 ? 14:30 +0000, Paul Howarth a ?crit : > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 07:52 -0500, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > +# IO::Multiplex support is optional, but since it's in FE and not including it > > +# causes build problems in some packages... > > +Requires: perl(IO::Multiplex) > > If perl(IO::Multiplex) is optional for perl-Net-Server but required for > some other package, why isn't the fix to add perl(IO::Multiplex) as a > buildreq/req for the other package? That way, anyone using > perl-Net-Server but not needing perl(IO::Multiplex) doesn't need to > install it. Actually I don't care one way or another, my (feeble) understanding is perl-Net-Server will enable some code if IO::Multiplex is present. Some packages clearly depend on IO::Multiplex and won't build if it's not there -> here a BR is needed as you pointed Others only depend directly on Net::Server. What happens if IO::Multiplex is present ? I think the multiplex code will get enabled too so : 1. they may get some benefit 2. more importantly the package behaviour won't depend on system state not traced in deps (ie if multiplex breaks them we'll know at once not when some other package installs it) But I'll freely admit the main reason I added it is because several people asked me to, and I'm a nice guy. If people on the list (or the perl list) feel strongly one way or another just say so and I'll follow the common view. As I wrote - I don't care strongly about it. 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 8 15:53:48 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:53:48 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136734454.5036.21.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136716909.4330.49.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136732906.30348.86.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136733556.2665.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136734454.5036.21.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1136735628.2665.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 08.01.2006, 10:34 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 16:19 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 08.01.2006, 15:08 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > > > Er, why can't we decrease the number of source RPMS to _one_? > > > Only one SRPM per kernel-module is not possible because we wouldn't get > > proper debug-rpms otherwise. > > Well, you can, but it's *VERY* ugly... > > http://fedora.ivazquez.net/yum/4/i386/SRPMS.ivazquez/kernel-module-zd1211-0.0-0.iva.1.r48.src.rpm We looked at similar solutions and decided that they're to ugly ;-) Cu thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 15:53:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 10:53:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081553.k08Frbes007048@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-08 10:53 EST ------- Why libupnp.so is in devel package and in libupnp package ? $ rpm -qil libupnp-devel Name : libupnp-devel Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 1.2.1a Vendor: (none) Release : 3 Build Date: dim 08 jan 2006 13:41:59 CET Install Date: dim 08 jan 2006 13:49:58 CET Build Host: bureau.maison Group : Development/Libraries Source RPM: libupnp-1.2.1a-3.src.rpmSize : 268973 License: BSD Signature : (none) URL : http://upnp.sourceforge.net/ Summary : Include files needed for development with libupnp Description : The libupnp-devel package contains the files necessary for development with the UPnP SDK libraries. /usr/include/upnp /usr/include/upnp/FreeList.h /usr/include/upnp/LinkedList.h /usr/include/upnp/ThreadPool.h /usr/include/upnp/TimerThread.h /usr/include/upnp/config.h /usr/include/upnp/iasnprintf.h /usr/include/upnp/ithread.h /usr/include/upnp/ixml.h /usr/include/upnp/upnp.h /usr/include/upnp/upnptools.h /usr/lib/libupnp.so $ rpm -qil libupnp Name : libupnp Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 1.2.1a Vendor: (none) Release : 3 Build Date: dim 08 jan 2006 13:41:59 CET Install Date: dim 08 jan 2006 13:49:57 CET Build Host: bureau.maison Group : System Environment/Libraries Source RPM: libupnp-1.2.1a-3.src.rpm Size : 221334 License: BSD Signature : (none) URL : http://upnp.sourceforge.net/ Summary : Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) SDK Description : The Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) SDK for Linux provides support for building UPnP-compliant control points, devices, and bridges on Linux. /usr/lib/libixml.so /usr/lib/libthreadutil.so /usr/lib/libupnp.so.1.2.1 /usr/share/doc/libupnp-1.2.1a /usr/share/doc/libupnp-1.2.1a/LICENSE /usr/share/doc/libupnp-1.2.1a/README -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 15:59:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 10:59:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081559.k08FxgvR007834@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-08 10:59 EST ------- Done. Builds OK in mock, tests complete without error. I'm thinking there's probably a lot less fragility in allowing the BR on libxslt to drag in libxml2 (/usr/bin/xmllint), correct? SPEC: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff.spec SRPM: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff-0.6.7-3.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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 16:05:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 11:05:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081605.k08G584a008301@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-08 11:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > Why libupnp.so is in devel package and in libupnp package ? This is normal (versioned library in main library, unversioned in -devel subpackage), e.g. $ rpm -ql libusb-devel | grep so /usr/lib/libusb.so /usr/lib/libusbpp.so $ rpm -ql libusb | grep so /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4.4.2 /usr/lib/libusbpp-0.1.so.4 /usr/lib/libusbpp-0.1.so.4.4.2 It's also a MUST according to the package review guidelines (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines): 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. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 16:32:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 11:32:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081632.k08GWHnL010915@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-08 11:32 EST ------- Moved %{?dist} to end of release tag http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite-2.0.0-0.13.svn110.fc5.src.rpm http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.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 Sun Jan 8 17:03:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:03:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081703.k08H3gcH013985@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-08 12:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Shouldn't the .so files be in the default library search path (i.e. > in /usr/lib) rather than in /usr/lib/itcl3.2 or /usr/lib/itk3.2, respectively? No, they shouldn't. These are libraries that are loaded by Tcl directly through dlopen(), not by using the dynamic linker. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 17:13:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:13:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177270] New: Review Request: libresample - A real-time library for audio sampling rate conversion 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=177270 Summary: Review Request: libresample - A real-time library for audio sampling rate conversion Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libresample-0.1.3-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libresample-0.1.3-1.src.rpm Description: A real-time library for audio sampling rate conversion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 17:27:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:27:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081727.k08HRSEA016252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-08 12:27 EST ------- (In reply to comment #28) > Joost, do you have a sponsor and an Extras account already? If yes, the package > was already approved in comment 26 and you can go ahead and import it. Imported -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Jan 8 17:46:11 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:46:11 -0500 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <1136722917.3108.35.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136722917.3108.35.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910601080946n2515dfe6x28000cc676a69267@mail.gmail.com> On 1/8/06, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > So, should we try and make a list of situation where %{?dist} is not > really needed (so we can recommend it in other cases)? There is already > one candidate: a font package in which fonts.cache-2 is ghosted in the > FC3/4 package. I think this is a waste of effort to attempt to make an exhaustive list of situations where ?dist is strictly needed or strictly not needed... simply because its never strictly needed. It is a tool which a maintainer may choose to use. It is documented in the wiki because it is the ONLY allowed mechanism by which distribution revision can be encoded into the release field of the packages. If anyone is confused as to the recommendation in the wiki for a specific package, they can come into this list and get more opinions as to what to do for the specific case. Unless the steering committee is prepared to make use of the ?dist something reviewers are suppose to check for... this level of detailed documentation as to why and why not you would choose to use it seems out of place to me. This simply isn't that important. ?dist doesn't automatically garuntee a workable upgrade path. Maintainers need to be educated about how the ENVR comparisons work in rpm instead of focusing on the list of reasons to use or not use ?dist. If maintainers want to mark the distribution revision in a package.. then they must use ?dist. If maintainers don't want to mark the distribution revision in a package then they don't have to use ?dist at all. If anyone else other than Roozbeh here is confused by the recommendation... then I suggest that all we need to do is ask spec authors to drop a comment in their spec saying why they didn't use ?dist as recommended in the wiki. That way anyone in the future can examine individual specfiles to learn what individual maintainers thought. -jef"damn the semantics! I'm going in!"spaleta From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 8 17:49:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 18:49:22 +0100 Subject: svn snapshot packages In-Reply-To: <1136723580.28835.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136723580.28835.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060108184922.4248c748.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 04:33:00 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > Would just like some clarification. > > In the wiki - > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines > > If a snapshot package is considered a "pre-release package", you should > follow the guidelines listed in Pre-Release Packages, and use an > %{alphatag} in the following format: > > YYYYMMDDcvs > > Where YYYY is the digits for the year, MM is the zero-padded digits for > the month, DD is the zero-padded digits for the day, and "cvs" is the > type of checkout. The date in reference is the date that the checkout > was taken. > > -=- > > With svn checkouts, is it OK to use the svn revision instead of > YYYYMMDD ? > > It is more precise imho as it specifies exactly the upstream revision > used (as there may be more than one revision on any given YYYYMMDD) It isn't more precise or not fully safe in general. The svn revision is specific to the life-time of the svn repository. The "date of checkout" is not. Prefer the YYYYMMDD marker. Or add "svnREVHERE" at the end instead of just "svn". E.g. 20060108svn541 Mind you, a YYYYMMDD checkout from CVS can also be from a branch much older than YYYYMMDD. Ultimately, the src.rpm contains exact information on what version of the software is included and how to check it out from cvs/svn. > Secondly - if it is OK to use the svn revision, is it OK to put the svn > before the revision? > > svn99 vs svn101 I think is cleaner than 99svn vs 101svn That's only because you want to replace the date with the svn rev. And if the developers switch from svn to cvs or vice versa, you no longer compare numbers, but source code versioning system acronyms. Stick to release numbers, and don't focus on the least-significant "junk" in the %{release} field. > But I'm flexible. > > -=- > Related %{?dist} question - > > pre-release snapshot packages always need to have an initial number of 0 > so that when final release is made, it can be bumped to 1 (as explained > in the wiki) > > I prefer to put the %{?dist} after the 0 before the %{alphatag} because > it guarantees that when upgrading distro, the package built against the > newer distro will look newer to yum. This normally would not be an > issue, but it might be if new code in the svn tree builds fine against > one compiler but doesn't against newer compiler in newer distro. Rare > case, sure, but ... project developers aren't always working with > bleeding edge compilers (which rawhide often uses). > > Thoughts appreciated. It's bad. Messy. Moving the dist tag to the left makes it enter the area of even more versioned Obsoletes/Provides/Requires, and so on. Keep the dist tag out of there. In which way would you benefit from moving the dist tag to the left? From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 8 17:48:51 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:48:51 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 07.01.2006, 23:19 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 13:12 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 13:50 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Panu (or everybody else of course), any idea how to implement it? I > > > searched a bit for the syntax of "%foreach", but wasn't able to find > > > anything. We of course could add a lot of "--with smp" "--with foo", > > > put we still would have to hardcode the names :-| . > > > > I did tell you it wasn't pretty. > > > > http://david.woodhou.se/modspec.tar.gz > > Something like this sounds ok to me provided the helpers will find their > way to eg. redhat-rpm-config and the ugliness doesn't need to be put > into every kmod specfile. How about the attached stuff? Find a SRPM for experiments at http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/SRPMS.fdr/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.7.pre3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4.src.rpm I planed to bury fedora-kmodhelper, but then I thought this would be the moment to kick it back to live. Old cruft removed. Maybe we should name it fedora-kmodhelper2 to avoid problems, but on on a second though it's probably not worth the trouble because (hopefully) nobody is using the old version anymore anyway. Comments? -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: fedora-kmodhelper Type: application/x-shellscript Size: 4600 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- # TODO: cmdir: (req: extra hw driver, http://www.innovationone.ca/) # this {sh,c}ould be external and a BR Source10: fedora-kmodhelper %define kmod_name lirc %define kverrel %(%SOURCE10 verrel %{?kver} 2>/dev/null) %{!?kvariants: %global kvariants %(%SOURCE10 variant %{?kver} 2>/dev/null)} Name: %{kmod_name}-kmod Version: 0.8.0 Release: 0.7.pre3.%(echo %{kverrel} | tr - _) Summary: LIRC kernel modules Group: System Environment/Kernel License: GPL #Source0: http://download.sourceforge.net/lirc/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 Source0: http://lirc.sf.net/software/snapshots/lirc-0.8.0pre3.tar.bz2 Patch0: %{name}-0.8.0pre2-gpio-no-bttvp.patch URL: http://www.lirc.org/ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) %description LIRC is a package that allows you to decode and send infra-red and other signals of many (but not all) commonly used remote controls. Included applications include daemons which decode the received signals as well as user space applications which allow controlling a computer with a remote control. This package contains additional kernel modules to support additional remote control units. # magic hidden here: %{expand:%(%{SOURCE10} rpmtemplate %{kmod_name} %{kverrel} %{kvariants} 2>/dev/null)} %prep # to understand the magic easier s/#/% the next line: #{SOURCE10} rpmtemplate %{kmod_name} %{kverrel} %{kvariants} 2>/dev/null ; sleep 5 %setup -q -n lirc-0.8.0pre3 %{__patch} -p0 < %{PATCH0} # save configure (is patches for some smp targets) cp configure configure.org # temp target dir for modules mkdir "$(pwd)"/.modules_dir %build for kvariant in %{kvariants} do [[ "${kvariant}" ]] || kvariant=up # cmdir: unknown symbols (cmdir_{read,write}, set_tx_channels), needs # additional hw driver from http://www.innovationone.ca/ # gpio: missing drivers/media/video/bttv.h in kernel-devel (?) ksrc=%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kverrel}${kvariant#up}-%{_target_cpu} nobuild="cmdir" [ -e $ksrc/drivers/media/video/bttv.h ] || nobuild="$nobuild gpio" [ "${kvariant}" = "smp" ] && nobuild="$nobuild parallel" for drv in $nobuild ; do sed -i -e "/^\\s*(lirc_dev lirc_$drv)/d" -e "/^\\s*lirc_$drv/d" \ configure* done touch -r aclocal.m4 configure.in # avoid autofoo re-run %configure \ --enable-sandboxed \ --with-kerneldir=%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kverrel}${kvariant#up}-%{_target_cpu} \ --with-moduledir=/lib/modules/%{kverrel}${kvariant#up}/extra/%{kmod_name} \ --with-driver=all make %{?_smp_mflags} -C drivers make -C drivers install \ DESTDIR="$(pwd)"/.modules_dir make -C drivers clean # reinstall old configure cp configure.org configure done %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT cp -av "$(pwd)"/.modules_dir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT rm -rf "$(pwd)"/.modules_dir chmod u+x $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/*/extra/%{kmod_name}/* %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %changelog * Sun Jan 8 2006 Thorsten Leemhuis - 0.8.0-0.7.pre3 - Experiment with a new fedora-kmodhelper - use a different approach for extracting/build/install * Wed Jan 4 2006 Ville Skytt?? - 0.8.0-0.6.pre3 - Drop 2.6.15pre support hack. - Clean up unneeded kernel-devel build dependency. * Sun Jan 1 2006 Ville Skytt?? - 0.8.0-0.5.pre3 - 0.8.0pre3. * Wed Dec 28 2005 Ville Skytt?? - 0.8.0-0.5.pre2 - Build non-UP modules against the correct source tree, D'oh! - Patch gpio driver to not require bttvp.h (private), build and ship it if bttv.h is in kernel-devel. - Disable parallel driver with SMP. * Wed Dec 28 2005 Ville Skytt?? - 0.8.0-0.4.pre2 - s/kmod-config(lirc)/lirc-kmod-common/ * Tue Dec 27 2005 Ville Skytt?? - 0.8.0-0.3.pre2 - Split from the main lirc package, adapt to new kmod standard. - Disable debugging features. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 18:09:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:09:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081809.k08I9hSx021592@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-08 13:09 EST ------- Ok thanks for the explanation? Someone can do a formal review 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 Jan 8 18:21:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:21:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081821.k08ILLm1022632@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-08 13:21 EST ------- rpmlint complaints resolved in -2: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version-0.51-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version.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 Sun Jan 8 18:25:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:25:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177272] New: Review Request: perl-DBD-XBase : DBI driver for XBase compatible database files 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=177272 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-XBase : DBI driver for XBase compatible database files Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-XBase.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-XBase-0.241-1.src.rpm Description: DBI driver for XBase compatible database files This package is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 18:27:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:27:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177274] New: Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement : Perl modules used to parse SQL statements 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=177274 Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement : Perl modules used to parse SQL statements Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Statement.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Statement-1.14-1.src.rpm Description: Perl modules used to parse SQL statements This package is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 18:29:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:29:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177275] New: Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats 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=177275 Summary: Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-AnyData.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-AnyData-0.10-1.src.rpm Description: The AnyData modules provide simple and uniform access to data from many sources -- perl arrays, local files, remote files retrievable via http or ftp -- and in many formats including flat files (CSV, Fixed Length, Tab Delimited, etc), standard format files (Web Logs, Passwd files, etc.), structured files (XML, HTML Tables) and binary files with parseable headers (mp3s, jpgs, pngs, etc). There are two separate modules, each providing a different interface: AnyData.pm provides a simple tied hash interface and DBD::AnyData provides a DBI/SQL interface. You can use either or both depending on your needs. This package is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 18:30:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:30:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177276] New: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats 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=177276 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-AnyData.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-AnyData-0.08-1.src.rpm Description: DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats This package is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 18:32:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177277] New: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT 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=177277 Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12-1.src.rpm Description: Portable LIMIT Emulation This package is a new BuildRequires for perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 18:48:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:48:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601081848.k08ImBDm025493@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-08 13:48 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.3-1): - 0.9.3 release - removed tracd (see comment #6) - added trac.conf for httpd Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.3-1.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 mpeters at mac.com Sun Jan 8 18:54:06 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 10:54:06 -0800 Subject: svn snapshot packages In-Reply-To: <20060108184922.4248c748.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136723580.28835.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <20060108184922.4248c748.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1136746446.28835.22.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 18:49 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > It isn't more precise or not fully safe in general. The svn revision is > specific to the life-time of the svn repository. The "date of checkout" is > not. Prefer the YYYYMMDD marker. Or add "svnREVHERE" at the end instead > of just "svn". E.g. 20060108svn541 OK. I'll do that. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 8 18:56:50 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 22:26:50 +0330 Subject: %{?dist}, recommended or optional? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601080946n2515dfe6x28000cc676a69267@mail.gmail.com> References: <1136625700.3111.8.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107153851.3e5605db.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136649642.3111.43.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <20060107231815.3606377b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1136712388.3108.18.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <1136721691.28835.2.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136722917.3108.35.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> <604aa7910601080946n2515dfe6x28000cc676a69267@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136746610.3125.4.camel@tameshk.bamdad.org> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 12:46 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > If anyone else other than Roozbeh here is confused by the > recommendation... Well I guess I have somehow made my mind. Sorry guys, I'll hush now. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 20:14:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 15:14:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082014.k08KEYjk008695@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-08 15:14 EST ------- You are proposing a package for FE, not "my devel box". There are also no provisions for Suse or Mandrake type startup sequences. IMHO, splitting tor in tor-lsb is just going to confuse users who are running this on FE, and not some devel box who want to install "tor" and not "tor-lsb". This is not "bloat" on FE systems, for which you are submitting a package. other comments: cat <>src/config/torrc.sample.in I personally dislike creating files from the spec file. They should be included as a SOURCE file. (some of these constucts fail in a non-interactive shell as well) tor is a very common name and often already exists on Scandinavian boxes. This will cause tor to fail during install. This is why my tor rpm/spec uses _tor instead of tor as user/group. Alternative torproxy or tordaemon could be used. tor uses libevent, but (wrongly) staticly links this. It should not do this and depend on the libevent package, which is part of FE. SOURCE1 is defined but not used. It should be removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 20:35:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 15:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082035.k08KZAuB010904@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-08 15:35 EST ------- Sorry, I do not see about which spec file you are speaking. There will neither a file created in the described way, nor libevent be linked statically nor a user 'tor' be created. When SuSE and Mandriva are LSB compliant there is a startup sequence for them in the -lsb subpackage. It is a good practice to include gpg signatures into the package to easy verification of the source tarballs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 21:07:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 16:07:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082107.k08L7QAE013440@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-08 16:07 EST ------- Successfully built in Plague. Can this bug be closed 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 Jan 8 21:28:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 16:28:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082128.k08LSRTd015054@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-08 16:28 EST ------- Insight (the GDB GUI) at least wants to link them directly. (They also include their own copies of Tcl/Tk/[incr Tcl]/[incr Tk]/[incr widgets] because they use internal Tcl headers, but with some packaging tricks you can get the binary RPM to use the installed ones 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 8 22:05:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 17:05:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082205.k08M5s4m018973@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-08 17:05 EST ------- Re: comment 10 [Paul Howarth] - not true. It is a packaging bug in this case. libupnp.so.1.2.1 is _not_ versioned. See comments 1-5. libupnp.so must go into the main package, since ldconfig would create it nevertheless (and then it would be "unowned"). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 8 22:59:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 17:59:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601082259.k08MxMgr023761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-08 17:59 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Insight (the GDB GUI) at least wants to link them directly. (They also include > their own copies of Tcl/Tk/[incr Tcl]/[incr Tk]/[incr widgets] because they use > internal Tcl headers, but with some packaging tricks you can get the binary RPM > to use the installed ones instead.) The recommended way of linking against these libraries is to use the itclConfig.sh and itkConfig.sh files provided by the -devel packages. However... itcl 3.2 does not generate usable itclConfig.sh/itkConfig.sh files, so they are not included. itcl 3.3, which is still under development, will have usable itclConfig.sh/itkConfig.sh files for linking directly against the extensions. I'm working on packaging itcl 3.3, even though it's still a release candidate. Until it works with iwidgets, though, I don't plan to upgrade the packages for FE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 00:06:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:06:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090006.k0906X5n029693@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-08 19:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Insight (the GDB GUI) at least wants to link them directly. (They also include > their own copies of Tcl/Tk/[incr Tcl]/[incr Tk]/[incr widgets] because they use > internal Tcl headers, but with some packaging tricks you can get the binary RPM > to use the installed ones instead.) Additionally, why does Insight need to link against the itcl/itk .so's instead of using Tcl's 'package require' mechanism to locate and load the extensions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 00:26:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:26:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090026.k090QuZC031794@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-08 19:26 EST ------- itcl now owns its own directories /usr/lib/itcl3.2 and /usr/lib/itk3.2: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl-3.2.1-6.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl.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 Mon Jan 9 00:36:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:36:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090036.k090aIc6032475@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-08 19:36 EST ------- > Additionally, why does Insight need to link against the itcl/itk .so's instead > of using Tcl's 'package require' mechanism to locate and load the extensions? Probably because they're hacking internal data structures (the same reason they're bundling their own copy of the source to get access to private headers). Anyway, for my Insight-derived package (http://lpg.ticalc.org/prj_tiemu/), I can just pass -Wl,-rpath arguments, and those building Insight (or TiEmu) from source will get the bundled copy of itcl anyway (and thus not require the system itcl package at all), so this is probably a non-issue. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 01:12:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:12:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090112.k091C1WF002381@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at conversis.de 2006-01-08 20:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #169) > One thing maybe someone here can answer: system/usb chokes on the line " for i > in `/bin/grep "driver: .*-hcd"|cut -d" " -f2 /etc/sysconfig/hwconf`". Tried > executing the grep in a terminal manually, which gave me loads of non relevant > stuff and then just stopped. I'm no bash expert so I don't know what happens, > anyone else? Good catch, this may be the reason initng doesn't boot my system at all at the moment. This got broken by the changes made in revision 2508 of initng. The line has to look like this: for i in `/bin/grep "driver: .*-hcd" /etc/sysconfig/hwconf|cut -d" " -f2` -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 04:22:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 23:22:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090422.k094MU4C019314@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-08 23:22 EST ------- Some remarks on this excerpt from the spec: sed -i "s|#!perl|#!%{_bindir}/perl|g" lib/version.pm sed -i "s|#!perl|#!%{_bindir}/perl|g" lib/version/vxs.pm 1. You'd better use %{__perl} instead of %{_bindir}/perl in the sed pattern above. 2. These 2 lines could be written as one: sed -i ... lib/version.pm lib/version/vxs.pm 3. The "global modifier" (.../g) in the sed pattern isn't necessary. I'll approve the package when point 1 has been addressed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 07:21:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 02:21:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090721.k097LIQR001346@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-09 02:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #172) > The line has to look like this: > > for i in `/bin/grep "driver: .*-hcd" /etc/sysconfig/hwconf|cut -d" " -f2` Ok, this is now fixed in svn (commit 2764) Can someone here take a look at http://bugzilla.initng.thinktux.net/show_bug.cgi?id=393 and tell me if you experience the same? This is a huge problem on one of the computers that I'm testing initng 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 Mon Jan 9 08:13:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 03:13:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174529] Review Request: clearsilver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601090813.k098DIGR007513@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-09 03:13 EST ------- (In reply to comment #30) > Successfully built in Plague. Can this bug be closed now? Yes, that's point 9 of the review process for contributor: 9. Once the package is built, close the bugzilla review ticket as NEXTRELEASE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 10:42:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 05:42:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091042.k09AgK2A026346@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From Jochen at herr-schmitt.de 2006-01-09 05:42 EST ------- Hello, it will be nice, if any may approve the package. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 9 10:47:48 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 11:47:48 +0100 Subject: Some BZ cleanups Message-ID: <200601091047.k09AlmDt029861@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi folks, I have removed the following closed tickets as blockers of FE-NEW: 171156, 173182, 174680, 174879, 174944, 175653, 175662, 176741 176867, 176986, 176987, 176988 There remains one closed blocker, 175163, but I can't access it ( You are not authorized to access bug #175163. )... There are also a bunch of non-NEW tickets still blocking FE-NEW, namely: 166796 [ASSIGNED - normal - gdk at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler. 166960 [ASSIGNED - normal - tcallawa at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: Fuse-emulator. 167943 [MODIFIED - normal - jvdias at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base. 168310 [REOPENED - normal - gdk at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: swish-e . 168690 [NEEDINFO - normal - gdk at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: pyBackPack (GTK+ Python backup tool). 174265 [ASSIGNED - normal - jpmahowald at gmail.com - ---] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl. 175198 [ASSIGNED - normal - jpo at di.uminho.pt - ---] Review Request: perl-Math-Pari. 177082 [ASSIGNED - normal - luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com - ---] Review Request: wm-icons. 177134 [ASSIGNED - normal - gdk at redhat.com - ---] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites. Could those who took the assignment please change the blocker to FE-REVIEW as per the review guidelines ? Thanks, Christian From jamatos at fc.up.pt Mon Jan 9 10:59:37 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:59:37 +0000 Subject: lyx-beamer In-Reply-To: <200601050856.28183.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <200601050856.28183.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <200601091059.37908.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Thursday 05 January 2006 08:56, Jose' Matos wrote: > ? I will post this issue to lyx devel list. The reason for beamer not to be included is that there are distributions with beamer independent from latex. This is true even for FC3 where latex-beamer was a separated package. In this case the right fix would be a subpackage with lyx-beamer as a subpackage of tetex. Since this can not be done due to the requirement of Core being self-contained I think the best solution is to to add the beamer layout to lyx package. LyX requires tetex so beamer is always guaranteed to be there. (For FC4+) -- Jos? Ab?lio From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Jan 9 11:42:40 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:42:40 +0100 Subject: rpms/obby/FC-4 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 obby.spec, 1.6, 1.7 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <200601040425.k044PmGY016895@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601040425.k044PmGY016895@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060109124240.5cd9b515.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 23:25:16 -0500, Luke Macken wrote: > Author: lmacken > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/obby/FC-4 > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv16874 > > Modified Files: > .cvsignore obby.spec sources > Log Message: > 0.3.0 > -BuildRequires: net6-devel, gmp-devel, gettext-devel, howl-devel > +BuildRequires: net6-devel, gmp-devel, gettext-devel, libsigc++ You either want libsigc++-devel or libsigc++20-devel From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 11:50:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 06:50:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176006] Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091150.k09Bon2E003749@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Streamtuner - a stream directory browser. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176006 ------- Additional Comments From endur at bennewitz.com 2006-01-09 06:50 EST ------- > Spec Url: http://www.bennewitz.com/rpms/streamtuner.spec > SRPM Url: http://www.bennewitz.com/rpms/streamtuner-0.99.99-6.fc4.src.rpm I have removed these files. > Removing the BR will break the build. Removing the Requires a few lines > above would be correct, since the scriptlets no longer run > desktop-update-database. Thanks, yes, of course... I have noticed this later myself and, at once, corrected again. Otherwise, the build hangs at the missed desktop-file-install binary. This ticket can be closed 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 thomas at apestaart.org Mon Jan 9 12:49:36 2006 From: thomas at apestaart.org (Thomas Vander Stichele) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:49:36 +0100 Subject: gst-python and fc devel Message-ID: <1136810976.3744.7.camel@otto> Hi everyone, gstreamer-python needs to be updated in extras. Moving from FC4 to FC5test, the gstreamer-* rpms have been renamed to gstreamer08-* (since they're now compat packages), and the new 0.10 versions now use the gstreamer- namespace. This means I would like to provide both gstreamer08-python and gstreamer-python. This would mean copying the current gstreamer-python package in CVS, and putting the 0.10 version in place of the old one. Since this is a little different from the normal import case, I'm asking here what I should do exactly in this case. Do I just import the gstreamer08-python package as a "new" package, and update the current gstreamer-python spec to the 0.10 version ? Thanks Thomas Dave/Dina : future TV today ! - http://www.davedina.org/ <-*- thomas (dot) apestaart (dot) org -*-> Lover fair We'll be looking sharp I swear I want them all to stop and stare When we take'em down <-*- thomas (at) apestaart (dot) org -*-> URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.fm/ From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Mon Jan 9 13:00:17 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:00:17 -0500 Subject: gst-python and fc devel In-Reply-To: <1136810976.3744.7.camel@otto> References: <1136810976.3744.7.camel@otto> Message-ID: <1136811617.6229.18.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 13:49 +0100, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: > Since this is a little different from the normal import case, I'm asking > here what I should do exactly in this case. Do I just import the > gstreamer08-python package as a "new" package, and update the current > gstreamer-python spec to the 0.10 version ? That's how I did it for sqlite2/sqlite. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 13:21:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 08:21:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169927] Review Request: scim-fcitx - Chinese IMEngine for SCIM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091321.k09DLjfV014807@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scim-fcitx - Chinese IMEngine for SCIM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169927 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-09 08:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Package imported into cvs, devel build and cvs branches requested. Could you please set the ticket to CLOSED / NEXTRELEASE ? 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 Mon Jan 9 13:24:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 08:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173080] Review Request: fdupes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091324.k09DOYtD015352@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fdupes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173080 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-09 08:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19) > It's in now. Could you then set this ticket to CLOSED / NEXTRELEASE ? 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 Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 13:31:10 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:31:10 +0100 Subject: Some more BZ cleanups and comments Message-ID: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi folks, I have removed those 3 tickets as FE-REVIEW blockers, because they were withdrawn by the OP: 166389, 167563, 172870 I have moved 3 other tickets from FE-REVIEW to FE-ACCEPT blockers, as they were APPROVED/closed already: 173105, 174496, 175276 There are (oddly) quite a few NEW tickets blocking FE-REVIEW: 165878 - Review Request: kadu OP needs a sponsor moved to FE-REVIEW by John Mahowald on 2005-12-20, but he added no comment... 166205 - Review Request: alleyoop : Graphical front-end to the Valgrind memory checker for x86 been stuck since 2005-09-02 166414 - Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) been stuck since 2005-10-25 166470 - Review Request: taskjuggler been stuck since 2005-10-16 167974 - Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter moved to FE-REVIEW by Jens Petersen on 2005-10-05, but he added no comment... 170131 - Review Request: php-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution last comment on 2005-12-23 173388 - Review Request: Denial of Service evasion module for Apache last comment on 2005-12-20 173549 - Review Request: xfce4-mount-plugin moved to FE-REVIEW by Luya Tshimbalanga on 2005-12-05, but no comment 173552 - Review Request: xfce4-sensors-plugin been stuck since 2005-12-01 173553 - Review Request: xfce4-websearch-plugin strange ping-pong between FE -NEW -REVIEW -ACCEPT... 173653 - Review Request: xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin moved to FE-REVIEW by Luya Tshimbalanga on 2005-12-05, but no comment 173660 - Review Request: xfce4-diskperf-plugin moved to FE-REVIEW by Luya Tshimbalanga on 2005-12-17, but no comment 176452 - Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications last comment on 2006-01-07 There are also quite a few OPEN tickets blocking FE-ACCEPT for a long time: 165688 - Review Request: YAML-Parser-Syck - Perl Wrapper for the YAML Parser Extension: libsyck stuck since 2005-09-08 165932 - Review Request: An SMTP Client stuck since 2005-09-26 166207 - Review Request: rekall : A KDE database front-end application stuck since 2005-09-18 166251 - Review Request: perl-Apache-LogRegex stuck since 2005-08-20 166252 - Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Canvas stuck since 2005-09-15 166253 - Review Request: perl-Gtk2-GladeXML stuck since 2005-09-14 166254 - Review Request: perl-Imager stuck since 2005-09-16 166255 - Review Request: Sprog stuck since 2005-12-04 168185 - Review Request: z88dk - Z80 cross compiler stuck since 2005-10-26 168520 - Review Request: perl-Text-Levenshtein stuck since 2005-09-27 168583 - Review Request: perl-Crypt-DES_EDE3 stuck since 2005-10-24 168607 - Review Request: perl-Convert-PEM stuck since 2005-11-25 168610 - Review Request: perl-Convert-ASCII-Armour stuck since 2005-10-17 168830 - Review Request: perl-CPAN-DistnameInfo stuck since 2005-10-11 168831 - Review Request: perl-Parse-CPAN-Packages stuck since 2005-10-11 168905 - Review Request: python-nltk stuck since 2005-09-27 169361 - Review Request: nautilus-image-converter stuck since 2005-09-27 170309 - Review Request: opencv stuck since 2005-10-20 171334 - Review Request: nsd - stuck since 2005-12-12 171336 - Review Request: ldns stuck since 2005-12-12 172871 - Review Request: driftnet stuck since 2005-12-13 173035 - Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files stuck since 2005-12-17 It'd be nice, if the owners of those tickets could close them where appropriate. Thanks, Christian From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 9 13:50:06 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 05:50:06 -0800 Subject: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136814606.28835.31.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:31 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > 166414 - Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) > been stuck since 2005-10-25 I'm not sure why this is stuck - but if I recall, it needs a lot of work to fit properly in Fedora because upstream kind of expects it to all run from a self contained directory. I think once those issues are resolved though, it would be a good addition to extras. > 173388 - Review Request: Denial of Service evasion module for Apache > last comment on 2005-12-20 As far as this package goes - it is blocked by an incompatible license, so it needs to wait for upstream to fix the license before it can be approved. I think that is all it is waiting on. From pertusus at free.fr Mon Jan 9 14:08:45 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:08:45 +0100 Subject: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: <1136814606.28835.31.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136814606.28835.31.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060109140845.GC2671@free.fr> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 05:50:06AM -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:31 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > > 166414 - Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) > > been stuck since 2005-10-25 > > I'm not sure why this is stuck - but if I recall, it needs a lot of work > to fit properly in Fedora because upstream kind of expects it to all run > from a self contained directory. I think once those issues are resolved > though, it would be a good addition to extras. I am currently working on it hopefully it should be approved soon. -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 14:52:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 09:52:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091452.k09EqwuD026711@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-09 09:52 EST ------- I made a patch to put conf files in /etc. I also modified the license such that it is only GPL and not BSD/GPL as BSD/GPL could be interpreted as if it was dual licenced and it is not the case. I added a comment to explain that Xbae is BSD and cephes is LGPL. With that patch applied here is the review: - rpmlint gives: W: grace dangling-symlink /usr/share/grace/bin /usr/bin W: grace symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/grace/bin /usr/bin W: grace-devel dangling-symlink /usr/share/grace/lib /usr/lib W: grace-devel symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/grace/lib /usr/lib W: grace-devel dangling-symlink /usr/share/grace/include /usr/include W: grace-devel symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/grace/include /usr/include this should be ignored - package name follows the guidelines - spec file is grace.spec - package meets the packaging guidelines - licences are compatible with fedora extras, licence files are included - licence (GPL) matches the package licence - spec is in legible american english - sources match upstream - builds in FC-4 mock - right BuildRequires - no shared libs - not relocatable - owns all the non FHS directories - no duplicate in %files - correct defattr - rm -rf %{buildroot} in %clean - consistent use of rpm macros - no need to split doc to another package - docs don't affect runtime - headers and static libs in a devel subpackage - use a fully versionned Requires for base package in devel package - desktop file is present 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 Jan 9 15:00:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169361] Review Request: nautilus-image-converter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091500.k09F0mmI027871@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nautilus-image-converter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169361 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-09 10:00 EST ------- Published. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 15:07:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:07:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177204] Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091507.k09F7u8E028678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177204 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-09 10:07 EST ------- Updated version, fixing a bug in pofilter which failed when some optional requirements were not present: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit-0.8-0.3.rc5.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 Jan 9 15:13:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:13:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177272] Review Request: perl-DBD-XBase : DBI driver for XBase compatible database files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091513.k09FDYpt029474@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-XBase : DBI driver for XBase compatible database files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177272 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-09 10:13 EST ------- Already in Extras. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 175895 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 15:13:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:13:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175895] Review Request: perl-DBD-XBase - Perl module for reading and writing the dbf files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091513.k09FDkmT029577@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-XBase - Perl module for reading and writing the dbf files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175895 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tcallawa at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-09 10:13 EST ------- *** Bug 177272 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 Mon Jan 9 15:16:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:16:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177274] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement : Perl modules used to parse SQL statements In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091516.k09FG31g029934@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement : Perl modules used to parse SQL statements https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177274 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-09 10:15 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 175896 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 15:16:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:16:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091516.k09FGA0n029981@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tcallawa at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-09 10:16 EST ------- *** Bug 177274 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 Mon Jan 9 15:37:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:37:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091537.k09Fb6PQ000905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |paul at city-fan.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-09 10:36 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is GPL or Artistic, matches spec. - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds OK on FC4 (i386) and in mock for rawhide (i386) - BR's 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 entry needed - no scriptlets 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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 15:56:06 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:56:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060109155606.798F68012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 nethack-vultures-1.11.2-2.fc3 nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3.fc3 perl-Net-Server-0.90-1.fc3 rootsh-1.5.2-2.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 Jan 9 16:00:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:00:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177315] New: Review Request: python-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking 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=177315 Summary: Review Request: python-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: roozbeh at farsiweb.info QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/python-enchant.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/python-enchant-1.1.3-1.src.rpm Description: PyEnchant is a spellchecking library for Python, based on the Enchant library by Dom Lachowicz. Additional notes: PyEnchant is an optional dependency of Translate Toolkit (bug 177204). I plan to make python-enchant a required dependency of translate-toolkit as soon as both packages are 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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 16:07:10 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:07:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060109160710.2A2978012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 clearsilver-0.10.2-2.fc4 esmtp-0.5.1-10.fc4 perl-Net-Server-0.90-1.fc4 python-feedparser-4.0.2-2.fc4 rootsh-1.5.2-2.fc4 tclxml-3.1-2.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From petro at mail.ru Mon Jan 9 15:53:49 2006 From: petro at mail.ru (Peter Lemenkov) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:53:49 +0300 Subject: HOWTo debug ppc-builds? was: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > 173035 - Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files > stuck since 2005-12-17 > > It'd be nice, if the owners of those tickets could close them where > appropriate. Could anyone help me to find out what exactly wrong with PPC-build? Chmlib builds fine at x86 and x86_64 achs. Maybe there is a way for contributor to gain ssh-access to powerpc-based system or something of that kind? I can't find out anything about this at FE-wiki. -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 16:11:16 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 17:11:16 +0100 Subject: HOWTo debug ppc-builds? was: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:53:49 +0300." Message-ID: <200601091611.k09GBGaC001794@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> petro at mail.ru said: > Could anyone help me to find out what exactly wrong with PPC-build? Do you have the URL of the failed build.log ? From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 16:13:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:13:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176946] Review Request: python-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091613.k09GDC4h007800@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-feedparser - Parse RSS and Atom feeds in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176946 icon at fedoraproject.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From icon at fedoraproject.org 2006-01-09 11:13 EST ------- Added to Extras, 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 Mon Jan 9 16:15:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:15:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091615.k09GFweD008269@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-09 11:15 EST ------- Okay, I've updated to 0.21-3 with these changes, same location as before. 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 Mon Jan 9 16:23:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:23:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091623.k09GNqUj010098@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 174546 depends on bug 174529, which changed state. Bug 174529 Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 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 Mon Jan 9 16:24:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:24:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177167] Review Request: perl-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091624.k09GOlqG010455@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-MD4 - Perl interface to the MD4 Algorithm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177167 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 11:24 EST ------- Thanks. Imported and built for FC-3, FC-4, and 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 Jan 9 16:28:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:28:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177166] Review Request: perl-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091628.k09GSOxO011449@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Compress-Bzip2 - Interface to Bzip2 compression library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177166 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 11:28 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Approved, with a few notes for consideration: > > - Trim down %description, the first paragraph should be fine. Done. > - Make sure that the bundled bzip2 source will never be used, by > rm -rf'ing bzlib-src in %prep or something like that. Just removing the bundled bzip2 source directory causes too many problems: missing files in manisfest list (W) and test failures (E). Will look into it tonight or tomorrow. > - Include ANNOUNCE in %docs Done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Mon Jan 9 16:36:05 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:36:05 +0000 Subject: HOWTo debug ppc-builds? was: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: References: <200601091331.k09DVAWR031706@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136824565.3443.36.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:53 +0300, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > Could anyone help me to find out what exactly wrong with PPC-build? > It uses some bizarre crap of its own instead of C99 types, and the gratuitous platform-specific ifdefs have '__ppc__' instead of '__powerpc__' so don't work on PPC. That much ought to be fairly obvious just from the build.log and looking at the code. The quick fix is s/__ppc__/__powerpc__/ in chmlib-chm_lib_c-ppc-patch.diff but the correct fix is to make it use proper types and get rid of all the ifdefs. > Chmlib builds fine at x86 and x86_64 achs. Maybe there is a way for > contributor to gain ssh-access to powerpc-based system or something of > that kind? I can't find out anything about this at FE-wiki. Mail me a SSH key if you need access to a PPC machine. -- dwmw2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 16:36:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:36:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091636.k09GaTrE013506@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-09 11:36 EST ------- -3 addresses all three points: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version-0.51-3.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-version.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 Mon Jan 9 16:37:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:37:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091637.k09Gbc5l013808@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-09 11:37 EST ------- Thanks, imported it into cvs with the patch applied. I will order a build for FC4 and FC3 and rework the X dependencies for 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 Jan 9 16:41:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:41:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091641.k09GfpoM014889@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-09 11:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #20) > it will be nice, if any may approve the package. Well, IMO, this package still needs quite some love before it can be approved. I tried to build your *-5.rpm and am still seeing quite a lot of arguable details: 1. /usr/bin/gst contains a invalid rpath. 2. Disable building the static libs. 3. Many of the *st scripts in /usr/share carry a broken SHEBANG and broken permissions. 4. Please explain the purpose of the *-am.patch. In its core, the package renames the package (comprising the tarball's name!) and should not be applied. IMO this patch should not be applied. 5. make check should be moved to %check ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 16:50:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:50:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091650.k09GofEc016905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-09 11:50 EST ------- Added date of svn checkout to alphatag http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite-2.0.0-0.14.20060108svn110.fc5.src.rpm http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.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 Mon Jan 9 16:59:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:59:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091659.k09Gxkbn018954@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 11:59 EST ------- Thanks. Imported and built for FC-4 and 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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 17:06:57 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:36:57 +0330 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch Message-ID: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> I'm not sure I really understand the pythong_sitelib and python_sitearch (from fedora-rpmdevtools' spectemplate-python.spec) macros properly. Two questions: 1) Will these two macros produce different results on 64-bit machines? They expand to the same thing on my i386. 2) Should each package use only one of the macros in its %files section? 2a) If yes, why don't we make it one macro and define it based on if the package is noarch or not? 2b) If no, should architecture-dependent files of the package (*.so etc) use python_sitearch and others (*.py*) use python_sitelib? roozbeh From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 17:21:18 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:21:18 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601091047.k09AlmDt029861@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091047.k09AlmDt029861@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <604aa7910601090921gec8eac8ve7f23e56c377cb4c@mail.gmail.com> On 1/9/06, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > Could those who took the assignment please change the blocker to FE-REVIEW as > per the review guidelines ? If you are going to make these sorts of lists, please take look at the bug activity for those bugs. A switch to ASSIGNED status can for a number of reasons as a result of other bugzilla activity, without a reviewer actually taking review. Remember that gdk is the default assignee for all new review requests. If the assignee is still listed as gdk there is a good bet the slip into ASSIGNED status was the result of some other bugzilla action in the bug history and not an explict reassignment. What's funny is that you can explictly reassign and bugzilla will let the bug stay in the NEW state, but if you go into NEEDSINFO, you can't go back to NEW. You can not look at the ASSIGNED or NEW status draw any conclusions as to the real assignment status of the bug. Several bugzilla actions cause the bug to leave the NEW state with no mechanism to go back to NEW. For example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_activity.cgi?id=177134 It went into ASSIGNED status from a NEEDSINFO status. There is no mechanism to go back to NEW from NEEDSINFO. No reviewer has taken assignment for this bug so it is still appropriately blocking FE-NEW. You also have to watch out for situations where reviewers who can not claim sponsership mistakenly take assignment, realize they shouldn't have, and then assign back to gdk. I'd love to know how frequently this sort of thing happens with new submitters so I can gauge whether or not its a problem worth worrying about. For example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_activity.cgi?id=168690 In the future it might be best if you looked for bugs not assigned to gdk that are blocking FE-NEW to get a more accurate listing. Though perhaps its time to replace gdk with a virtual assignee specifically set up for FE-NEW tickets that could be consistently searched for when making cleanup lists like this. -jef From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 17:35:50 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:35:50 +0100 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 2006 12:21:18 EST." <604aa7910601090921gec8eac8ve7f23e56c377cb4c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> jspaleta at gmail.com said: > In the future it might be best if you looked for bugs not assigned to gdk > that are blocking FE-NEW to get a more accurate listing. Right. Point taken... > You also have to watch out for situations where reviewers who can not claim > sponsership mistakenly take assignment, realize they shouldn't have, and then > assign back to gdk. I'd love to know how frequently this sort of thing > happens with new submitters so I can gauge whether or not its a problem worth > worrying about. For example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/ > show_activity.cgi?id=168690 > Though perhaps its time to replace gdk with a virtual assignee specifically > set up for FE-NEW tickets that could be consistently searched for when making > cleanup lists like this. Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor - one for the rest of us ? Or maybe that's overly complicated... Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 17:33:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:33:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091733.k09HX8fL027295@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-09 12:32 EST ------- New version : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/libupnp-1.2.1a-4.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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 17:40:23 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:40:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060109174023.4E82C8012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 12 clearsilver-0.10.2-2.fc5 cvsweb-3.0.6-2.fc5 esmtp-0.5.1-10.fc5 gnome-applet-netspeed-0.13-2.fc5 libcaca-0.9-8.fc5 opensc-0.10.1-1.fc5 perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.09-2.fc5 perl-Digest-MD4-1.5-1.fc5 perl-Net-Server-0.90-1.fc5 perl-SQL-Statement-1.14-1.fc5 python-feedparser-4.0.2-2.fc5 rootsh-1.5.2-2.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 17:46:11 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 12:46:11 -0500 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> On Mon, 2006-09-01 at 20:36 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I'm not sure I really understand the pythong_sitelib and python_sitearch > (from fedora-rpmdevtools' spectemplate-python.spec) macros properly. Two > questions: > > 1) Will these two macros produce different results on 64-bit machines? > They expand to the same thing on my i386. > > 2) Should each package use only one of the macros in its %files > section? > > 2a) If yes, why don't we make it one macro and define it based on if the > package is noarch or not? > > 2b) If no, should architecture-dependent files of the package (*.so etc) > use python_sitearch and others (*.py*) use python_sitelib? You got it right. If you don't have any platform-specific code, use %{python_sitelib} exclusively. If you do, like C-binding stuff, then all these should go to %{python_sitearch}, since the location will be different on 64-bit architectures. Only .so files and friends should go to %{python_sitearch} -- so if you have platform-independent files they should still go to %{python_sitelib} even if you have other, platform-specific files. Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Simon: "Come on out, River. The nice man wants to kidnap you." From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 9 17:50:09 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:50:09 +0100 Subject: Tracker bug for packages from people searching for sponsors (Was: Re: Some BZ cleanups) In-Reply-To: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136829009.3461.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 09.01.2006, 18:35 +0100 schrieb Christian.Iseli at licr.org: > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: > - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor > - one for the rest of us > ? > Or maybe that's overly complicated... No, something like that IMHO would be helpful AFAICS. But I'm not sure if a virtual assignee is the best idea -- why not a tracker bug "FE-NEW-LOOKING-FOR-SPONSOR" ? CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 17:51:56 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:21:56 +0330 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136829116.3050.43.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:35 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: > - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor > - one for the rest of us > ? > > Or maybe that's overly complicated... This really makes sense. This way, non-sponsors can review some stuff, without the fear of their efforts wasted for a while just because the packager forgot to mention he needs a sponsor and no sponsor is in sight (not everybody is as lucky a bastard as I am ;-). Also, sponsors can easily find about what amount of work is really waiting on them, so they can either review more, or lobby more to make more active reviewers sponsors. roozbeh From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 17:57:58 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:57:58 +0100 Subject: Tracker bug for packages from people searching for sponsors (Was: Re: Some BZ cleanups) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:50:09 +0100." <1136829009.3461.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200601091757.k09Hvwnf003390@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > why not a tracker bug "FE-NEW-LOOKING-FOR-SPONSOR" ? I kinda like to have all the packages waiting for review in one tree. I worry a bit that, if there are two trees, the ones in the "NEED-SPONSOR" tree will get less reviews. Christian From petro at mail.ru Mon Jan 9 17:16:10 2006 From: petro at mail.ru (Peter Lemenkov) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:16:10 +0300 Subject: HOWTo debug ppc-builds? was: Some more BZ cleanups and comments In-Reply-To: <200601091611.k09GBGaC001794@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091611.k09GBGaC001794@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > petro at mail.ru said: >> Could anyone help me to find out what exactly wrong with PPC-build? > Do you have the URL of the failed build.log ? Look at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173035#c7 I tried to fix this error with: -#elif __i386__ || __sun || __sgi || __ppc__ +#elif __i386__ || __sun || __sgi || __ppc__ || ppc but failed (see link for details). Today's build-log (with applied patch above) is here: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2682-chmlib-0.37.4-3.fc5/ppc/ -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. From lists at timj.co.uk Mon Jan 9 18:13:50 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:13:50 -0000 (GMT) Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features Message-ID: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> Hi, I realise it's quite hard to generalise these things, but is there any kind of general policy on the use of Requires: when packages have certain (runtime) dependencies that they will work without, but which are required for full functionality? I believe that some other packaging systems have a way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). Clearly in some cases (e.g. php) some of the functionality can be split off into sub-packages that have their own Requires, and users install the subpackages of their choosing. However, for many runtime libraries and programs (e.g. Perl, PHP, CPAN, PEAR) there are deps that can't be split off. An example would be swaks (http://jetmore.org/john/code/#swaks). It's a reasonably substantial and very useful Perl application. I have a working spec file and rpmbuild auto-discovers the following requirements: perl(Getopt::Long) perl(IO::Socket) perl(Sys::Hostname) perl(Time::Local) perl(strict) With these requirements installed, the program runs and can perform some tasks. However, for full functionality a number of other modules are required: perl(Net::DNS) perl(Net::SSLeay) perl(MIME::Base64) perl(Time::HiRes) perl(Digest::MD5) perl(Authen::NTLM) perl(Authen::DigestMD5) Without these, not all the functionality of the program will work. For example, if you try to connect to an SMTP server that requires NTLM authentication (swaks is an SMTP tester), it will bomb out if Authen::NTLM is not installed. Clearly I *could* omit the "non required" deps, but at the same time most users (myself included) would probably want/expect/prefer the program to "just work" in its fully-functional form, in which case it would be a pain for them to have to go manually hunting for and installing the deps they need to give it full functionality. So there is obviously a tradeoff between "dependency bloat" and "making more things work out-of-the-box" I *could* create some fake subpackages (e.g. swaks-ntlm) with the extended requirements, but this seems rather like overkill for a small project and isn't very elegant. Any comments/suggestions appreciated. TIA. Tim From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 18:15:08 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:15:08 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136829116.3050.43.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136829116.3050.43.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <604aa7910601091015t38fd79b0w8ad2457c2dd82e8a@mail.gmail.com> On 1/9/06, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > This really makes sense. This way, non-sponsors can review some stuff, > without the fear of their efforts wasted for a while just because the > packager forgot to mention he needs a sponsor and no sponsor is in sight > (not everybody is as lucky a bastard as I am ;-). Logic fault.... The submitter would still have to correctly indicate they need a sponsor no matter what mechanism was used to make it easier to find reports that needs sponsors. You can still have the situation where the submitter forgets to indicate they need a sponsor. Having a different assignee or a different blocker bug when people submit only aids in finding those bugs later. The submitter still has to correctly submit the bug as a "needs sponsor" submission to prevent wasted effort. -jef From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 18:17:28 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:47:28 +0330 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:46 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Only .so files and friends should go to %{python_sitearch} -- so if you > have platform-independent files they should still go to > %{python_sitelib} even if you have other, platform-specific files. So, should one use double %dir definitions also in such cases? Something like the following? %dir %{python_sitelib}/module %{python_sitelib}/module/*.po ... %dir %{python_sitearch}/module %{python_sitearch}/module/_module.so roozbeh From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 9 18:26:05 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 10:26:05 -0800 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:35 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > t could be consistently searched for when making > > cleanup lists like this. > > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: > - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor > - one for the rest of us > ? > > Or maybe that's overly complicated... I made the mistake once - since then, I look for the e-mail address in the owners.list before I decide to take it for review. I think the way it is now is fine because sometimes I go through the FE-NEW and might make comments but not actually review on packages by new packagers, I probably would rarely look through a needs-sponsor bug. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 9 18:31:29 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:31:29 +0200 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:46 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Only .so files and friends should go to %{python_sitearch} -- so if you > have platform-independent files they should still go to > %{python_sitelib} even if you have other, platform-specific files. I don't think I've every seen a package that would install things to both, but in contrast several others that dump either all into sitearch or all into sitelib. A single arch dependent file seems to be enough for distutils for using arch specific dirs for all files installed in that batch. From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 9 18:32:40 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 10:32:40 -0800 Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> Message-ID: <1136831560.4773.12.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:13 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: > Hi, > > I realise it's quite hard to generalise these things, but is there any > kind of general policy on the use of Requires: when packages have certain > (runtime) dependencies that they will work without, but which are required > for full functionality? I believe that some other packaging systems have a > way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, > but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). No it doesn't. I wish it did - I've got one package where I wish it did. It could be done in rpm such that rpm ignores, but front ends (ie yum) could be configured to add them to the transaction. perl-Readonly is a case where it would benefit from this. perl-Readonly gets a performance boost if perl-Readonly-XS is installed, but it can not explicitly require it because perl-Readonly-XS requires perl-Readonly to build so that would cause some problems. It would be nice though to have a suggest tag so that perl-Readonly could suggest perl-Readonly-XS and yum etc. could be configured to just grab it. *snip* > > An example would be swaks (http://jetmore.org/john/code/#swaks). It's a > reasonably substantial and very useful Perl application. I have a working > spec file and rpmbuild auto-discovers the following requirements: > > perl(Getopt::Long) perl(IO::Socket) perl(Sys::Hostname) perl(Time::Local) > perl(strict) > > With these requirements installed, the program runs and can perform some > tasks. However, for full functionality a number of other modules are > required: > > perl(Net::DNS) perl(Net::SSLeay) perl(MIME::Base64) perl(Time::HiRes) > perl(Digest::MD5) perl(Authen::NTLM) perl(Authen::DigestMD5) > > Without these, not all the functionality of the program will work. For > example, if you try to connect to an SMTP server that requires NTLM > authentication (swaks is an SMTP tester), it will bomb out if Authen::NTLM > is not installed. Personally - I would manually add them to the Requires > > Clearly I *could* omit the "non required" deps, but at the same time most > users (myself included) would probably want/expect/prefer the program to > "just work" in its fully-functional form, in which case it would be a pain > for them to have to go manually hunting for and installing the deps they > need to give it full functionality. So there is obviously a tradeoff > between "dependency bloat" and "making more things work out-of-the-box" > > I *could* create some fake subpackages (e.g. swaks-ntlm) with the extended > requirements, but this seems rather like overkill for a small project and > isn't very elegant. > > Any comments/suggestions appreciated. TIA. Suggests would solve the issue - I'm guessing though in your case, just adding them as explicit requires would be best. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 18:31:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:31:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091831.k09IVFfu009485@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 13:31 EST ------- Tom, Do you want this perl module built for FC-3 ? jpo Notes: * the BR perl-DBD-XBase builds without problems in FC-3 (CVS branch needs to created) * the perl-SQL-Statement BRs DBI/DBD::File in FC-3 can be problematic if we want to improve the test suite coverage: the FC-3 DBI version doesn't include the DBD::File module (it needs to be packaged separately). More recent DBI versions include the DBD::File module but it also continues to have its own tarball in CPAN. Links: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBI/ http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBD-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 ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 9 18:36:25 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:36:25 +0200 Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> Message-ID: <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:13 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: > I believe that some other packaging systems have a > way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, > but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). It does in >= 4.4 (Suggests:, Enhances:, Requires(missingok), maybe others (and maybe I don't remember the names accurately)) but I'm not aware of any frontends which would support that functionality. Not sure about plain rpm CLI. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 18:34:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:34:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091834.k09IYr67010346@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-09 13:34 EST ------- Its up to you. 99% of the perl modules I maintain are for perl-Maypole, and that won't build on FC-3 due to Apache restrictions. I've been building everything that works without pain on FC-3 as a convenience to other maintainers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 18:39:06 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:09:06 +0330 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601091015t38fd79b0w8ad2457c2dd82e8a@mail.gmail.com> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136829116.3050.43.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <604aa7910601091015t38fd79b0w8ad2457c2dd82e8a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136831946.3050.61.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 13:15 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Logic fault.... The submitter would still have to correctly indicate > they need a sponsor no matter what mechanism was used to make it > easier to find reports that needs sponsors. You can still have the > situation where the submitter forgets to indicate they need a sponsor. Not if http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/NewPackageProcess point to two slightly different forms. The NewPackageProcess page points newbies in large and friendly letters to the Contributors page, and I believe first-timers who'll still choose to follow the NewPackage process, will already be in some trouble. > Having a different assignee or a different blocker bug when people > submit only aids in finding those bugs later. The submitter still has > to correctly submit the bug as a "needs sponsor" submission to prevent > wasted effort. Well, the submitter usually clicks on a link instead of entering the bugzilla form's URL directly. We only need to make sure that first-time submitters use the first link, with the already-sponsored people's link only linked to from somewhere more hidden in the wiki. roozbeh From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 9 18:42:46 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:42:46 +0100 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 09.01.2006, 10:26 -0800 schrieb Michael A. Peters: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:35 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > t could be consistently searched for when making > > > cleanup lists like this. > > > > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: > > - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor > > - one for the rest of us > > ? > > > > Or maybe that's overly complicated... > > I made the mistake once - since then, I look for the e-mail address in > the owners.list before I decide to take it for review. > > I think the way it is now is fine because sometimes I go through the > FE-NEW and might make comments but not actually review on packages by > new packagers, I probably would rarely look through a needs-sponsor bug. Yeah, and the reverse (from a sponsors point of view) is exactly the problem: The sponsor has to go though *all* bugs to find those waiting for a sponsor. And that's a problem afaics because they (including me) often don't do that. BTW, where is the problem if you "would rarely look through a needs-sponsor bugs"? They need a sponsor for review, so if you're no sponsor you can't do anything there in most cases anyway. Save time for you, too. But if others agree with you let's just use use another virtual assignee for bugs waiting for a sponsor as Christian suggested. That would be suitable for both parties afaics. Of course the packager can forget to change the assignee or to report that he's searching for a sponsor. That will always happen, but that's life. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 9 18:42:50 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:42:50 +0200 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601091047.k09AlmDt029861@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601091047.k09AlmDt029861@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1136832170.14319.23.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:47 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > 177134 [ASSIGNED - normal - gdk at redhat.com - ---] > Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites. [...] > Could those who took the assignment please change the blocker to FE-REVIEW as > per the review guidelines ? As far as I'm concerned, mkvtoolnix is not under review, it is waiting for legal comments from someone. It has been changed to ASSIGNED automatically by Bugzilla after I set it to NEEDINFO from NEW and the submitter replied to it, and seems there's no way to "fix" that. From icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 18:50:31 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:50:31 -0500 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136832631.3553.80.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> On Mon, 2006-09-01 at 20:31 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:46 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > > Only .so files and friends should go to %{python_sitearch} -- so if you > > have platform-independent files they should still go to > > %{python_sitelib} even if you have other, platform-specific files. > > I don't think I've every seen a package that would install things to > both, but in contrast several others that dump either all into sitearch > or all into sitelib. A single arch dependent file seems to be enough > for distutils for using arch specific dirs for all files installed in > that batch. Well, the purpose for sitearch is to be able to install multiple architectures on the same machine. It will work fine if you put everything into %{python_sitearch}, including platform-independent stuff together with c-bindings, but that means you'll have duplicated files if you install both .i386 and .x86-64. On the other hand, if you only put c-bindings into %{python_sitearch}, and the platform-independent stuff into %{python_sitelib}, the packages for both .i386 and .x86-64 won't duplicate functionality and only one set of non-platform specific files will be installed (granted that they are identical, of course, which they should be). Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG River: "It's just an object. Doesn't mean what you think." From icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 18:51:39 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:51:39 -0500 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1136832699.3553.83.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> On Mon, 2006-09-01 at 21:47 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:46 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > Only .so files and friends should go to %{python_sitearch} -- so if you > > have platform-independent files they should still go to > > %{python_sitelib} even if you have other, platform-specific files. > > So, should one use double %dir definitions also in such cases? Something > like the following? > > %dir %{python_sitelib}/module > %{python_sitelib}/module/*.po > ... > %dir %{python_sitearch}/module > %{python_sitearch}/module/_module.so Yes. Hmm, wait, does this generate "duplicate entries" warning? Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Jayne: "... and if wishes were horses we'd all be eating steak!" From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 18:49:45 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:19:45 +0330 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136832585.3050.66.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:31 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > I don't think I've every seen a package that would install things to > both, but in contrast several others that dump either all into sitearch > or all into sitelib. A single arch dependent file seems to be enough > for distutils for using arch specific dirs for all files installed in > that batch. Ah, so I've got it all wrong. Should I, having only an i386 box, read setup.py and see where it installs things instead of separating them myself based on the type? roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 18:57:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:57:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175896] Review Request: perl-SQL-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601091857.k09IvDKD015227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Statement - SQL parsing and processing engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175896 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 13:57 EST ------- In that case I will skip building them for FC-3. I am only packaging these modules because they are BR of perl-Log-Log4perl which I am only targeting for Fedora >= 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 19:04:38 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 14:04:38 -0500 Subject: Tracker bug for packages from people searching for sponsors (Was: Re: Some BZ cleanups) In-Reply-To: <200601091757.k09Hvwnf003390@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <1136829009.3461.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200601091757.k09Hvwnf003390@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <604aa7910601091104t77bb387ra70c2fbc38c1fdcb@mail.gmail.com> On 1/9/06, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > fedora at leemhuis.info said: > > why not a tracker bug "FE-NEW-LOOKING-FOR-SPONSOR" ? > > I kinda like to have all the packages waiting for review in one tree. I worry > a bit that, if there are two trees, the ones in the "NEED-SPONSOR" tree will > get less reviews. You have the bug block against 2 trackers at the same time if we wanted all the new request to show up in FE-NEW. The blocker bug entry takes a comma seperated list of bugnumbers. So you could have a form for new submitters which pre-filled both FE-NEW and NEED-SPONSOR in bugreports? This way reviewers can still help brush up new submissions from new submitters as they roll in to the FE-NEW blocker and even claim co-maintainership status for them to help the package into Extras without being the formal reviewer. The submision form for existing contributors would just pre-fill FE-NEW as a blocker. This level of discussion is secondary implementation details. The important question is whether or not any implementation to seperate the NEED-SPONSOR bugs is needed. I think its something to bring up for steering committee agenda if enough sponsors think it would help them deal with sponsorship request more efficiently. -jef From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 9 19:14:25 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:44:25 +0330 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136832699.3553.83.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136832699.3553.83.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1136834065.3050.70.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 13:51 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > So, should one use double %dir definitions also in such cases? Something > > like the following? > > > > %dir %{python_sitelib}/module > > %{python_sitelib}/module/*.po > > ... > > %dir %{python_sitearch}/module > > %{python_sitearch}/module/_module.so > > Yes. Hmm, wait, does this generate "duplicate entries" warning? Yes, it does. Should I ignore the warning or is there a recommended way to avoid it? (I can only think of a conditional to compare the two python_site* macros and only define the second %dir if they were different.) roozbeh From jamatos at fc.up.pt Mon Jan 9 19:21:33 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:21:33 +0000 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136832585.3050.66.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136831489.14319.13.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136832585.3050.66.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <200601091921.34795.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Monday 09 January 2006 18:49, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > Ah, so I've got it all wrong. Should I, having only an i386 box, read > setup.py and see where it installs things instead of separating them > myself based on the type? In reality this is never a problem. This error is caught in review and it is simply a matter of saying change from sitearch to sitelib... I know this since I have reviewed several python packages before. :-) > roozbeh -- Jos? Ab?lio From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 17:42:37 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 12:42:37 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <604aa7910601090921gec8eac8ve7f23e56c377cb4c@mail.gmail.com> <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <604aa7910601090942j5852e104m1e86fe8184bd2a00@mail.gmail.com> On 1/9/06, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > Speaking about which: could it be a good idea to have two virtual assignees: > - one for new contributors seeking a sponsor > - one for the rest of us > ? > > Or maybe that's overly complicated... Or just a different blocker bug FE-NEED-SPONSOR, if this is a problem that happens with enough frequency to merit a "fix". I honestly don't know if its a problem or not. The only people who can really comment are the people who have sponsorship ability. Would it be useful for them to have a better mechansim by which to find submission requests from people who need to be sponsored? -jef From icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 9 19:30:52 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:30:52 -0500 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136834065.3050.70.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136832699.3553.83.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136834065.3050.70.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1136835052.3553.86.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> On Mon, 2006-09-01 at 22:44 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > Yes. Hmm, wait, does this generate "duplicate entries" warning? > > Yes, it does. Should I ignore the warning or is there a recommended way > to avoid it? (I can only think of a conditional to compare the two > python_site* macros and only define the second %dir if they were > different.) I don't really know. Best is to leave things as simple as possible. Where do setuptools install the non-arch-specific files on an x86_64 machine? If they are all placed in lib64, then it's probably better to go with upstream and use %{python_sitearch} for all files instead of diverging. -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Mr. Tam: "Are you trying to destroy this family?" Simon: "I didn't realize it would be so easy." From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 9 20:32:26 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:32:26 +0200 Subject: Avoiding unnecessary package updates (was: rpms/R/FC-4 R.spec,1.11,1.12) In-Reply-To: <200601091926.k09JQwHV010813@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601091926.k09JQwHV010813@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1136838746.14319.33.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:26 -0500, Tom Callaway wrote: > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/R/FC-4 > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv10763/FC-4 > > Modified Files: > R.spec > Log Message: > > fix BR: XFree86-devel for FC-5 Would it be possible to avoid doing gratuitous builds/updates like this for older distro versions? In this case, it looks like the only changes to the R package in FC-3 and FC-4 was a bump of the release tag (to keep it in sync with FC-5 even though the specfile contents are not in sync otherwise). But the packages were rebuilt for the older distros too -> users of those will in this case download a 18+ MB update which doesn't contain any changes apart from the release tag... From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 9 20:52:30 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:52:30 +0200 Subject: default python spec template: python_sitelib vs python_sitearch In-Reply-To: <1136835052.3553.86.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> References: <1136826417.3050.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136828771.3553.73.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136830649.3050.50.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136832699.3553.83.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> <1136834065.3050.70.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136835052.3553.86.camel@rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1136839950.14319.51.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:30 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > On Mon, 2006-09-01 at 22:44 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > Yes. Hmm, wait, does this generate "duplicate entries" warning? > > > > Yes, it does. Should I ignore the warning or is there a recommended way > > to avoid it? (I can only think of a conditional to compare the two > > python_site* macros and only define the second %dir if they were > > different.) > > I don't really know. Best is to leave things as simple as possible. > Where do setuptools install the non-arch-specific files on an x86_64 > machine? Depends. As said, if the set of files to be installed contain _any_ arch specific files, all of them, including non-arch-specific ones in the set, are according to my experience installed to sitearch (%{_libdir}/pythonX.X/site-packages nowadays). If there are no arch-specific files in the set, everything is installed to sitelib (/usr/lib/pythonX.X/site-packages nowadays, note: not %{_libdir}!). The spec template should be safe to use like: "if noarch package, use only %{python_sitelib}, if not noarch, use only %{python_sitearch}". It's the same as with %{perl_vendorlib} and %{perl_vendorarch}. And it should also work without specfile changes in the (somewhat unlikely, but thinkable) case where non-arch-specific python stuff would some day be moved to eg. %{_datadir}/pythonX.X/site-packages. Oh, and a FYI, %{python_sitearch} and %{python_sitelib} are defined the same way as in the current python spec template in rpm >= 4.4.3's /usr/lib/rpm/macros. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 9 21:05:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:05:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092105.k09L56SW013198@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 ------- Additional Comments From mitr at redhat.com 2006-01-09 16:04 EST ------- - I can't find any file or directory called "*profile*" in the built directory, have I missed anything? The tarball 4Suite-1.0b3/profile/ files don't look useful: a) upstream doesn't install them, why should we? b) at least profile_all.py references "create_document.py" and other test files which are not present in the tarball - the test suite fails, so it would just clutter the logs and new failures would be hidden among the "regular" failures. The test suite was failing in all 4Suite releases I have ever packaged, IIRC. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 21:08:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:08:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092108.k09L84uw013740@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-09 16:07 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.3-1): - all tracd removed - removed trac/test.py - removed commented out stuff - change perms on htdocs/js/wikitoolbar.js - added simplified trac.conf (from attachment id=122964) Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.3-1.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 Jan 9 21:24:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:24:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092124.k09LOgo4017156@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-09 16:24 EST ------- It seems you took the simplified config that was meant to be applied if trac.fcgi is removed from the package, but it's still there. If you think the fcgi version adds some value, grab the config from comment 9 instead. (But I tend to think trac.fcgi could be just dropped.) tracd man page is still installed. Minor nit: you'll probably want to say %%{python_sitelib} with two '%'s in %changelog in order to prevent it from expanding. Another nit: please bump the release tag every time you make changes to it, that makes it much easier for me to track changes between revisions during 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 Mon Jan 9 21:25:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:25:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092125.k09LPqto017426@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-09 16:25 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > It seems you took the simplified config that was meant to be applied if > trac.fcgi is removed from the package, but it's still there. If you think the > fcgi version adds some value, grab the config from comment 9 instead. Aargh, not comment 9, but comment 8. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 21:26:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:26:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092126.k09LQvvi017706@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-09 16:26 EST ------- > I'm working on packaging itcl 3.3, even though it's still a release candidate. > Until it works with iwidgets, though, I don't plan to upgrade the packages for FE. I need iwidgets too, so I can only agree. But why does the upgrade break iwidgets? If it's incompatible language changes, then won't that break user programs too? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 9 21:49:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:49:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601092149.k09Ln2ZR023699@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-09 16:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > > I'm working on packaging itcl 3.3, even though it's still a release > candidate. > > Until it works with iwidgets, though, I don't plan to upgrade the packages > for FE. > I need iwidgets too, so I can only agree. > > But why does the upgrade break iwidgets? If it's incompatible language changes, > then won't that break user programs too? Quite likely, yes. I'll try to dig up the original post that mentioned the incompatibility and verify it myself on some of my own code. It's possible that I misread a build incompatibility (which I fixed in the spec files) as a runtime incompatibility. If so then I'll update these packages from 3.2 to 3.3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From lists at timj.co.uk Mon Jan 9 22:03:34 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 22:03:34 -0000 (GMT) Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <50175.84.92.175.66.1136844214.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> On Mon, January 9, 2006 6:36 pm, Ville Skytt? said: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:13 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: >> I believe that some other packaging systems have a >> way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, >> but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). > It does in >= 4.4 (Suggests:, Enhances:, Requires(missingok), maybe > others (and maybe I don't remember the names accurately)) but I'm not > aware of any frontends which would support that functionality. Not sure > about plain rpm CLI. Wow. That one missed me (and others, by the sound of it). Interesting. Unfortunately it seems pretty useless right now, at least on FC4: Name: test Suggests: test2 $ rpmbuild -ba newpackage.spec error: line 9: Unknown tag: Suggests: test2 Name: test Enhances: test2 $ rpmbuild -ba newpackage.spec error: line 9: Unknown tag: Enhances: test2 Name: test Requires(missingok): test2 [rpmbuild is OK] # rpm -q yum yum-2.4.1-1.fc4 # rpm -q rpm rpm-4.4.1-22 # rpm -ivh test-1-1.i386.rpm error: Failed dependencies: test2 is needed by test-1-1.i386 # yum localinstall test-1-1.i386.rpm Setting up Local Package Process Examining test-1-1.i386.rpm: test - 1-1.i386 Marking test-1-1.i386.rpm to be installed Resolving Dependencies --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. ---> Package test.i386 0:1-1 set to be updated --> Running transaction check Setting up repositories Reading repository metadata in from local files --> Processing Dependency: test2 for package: test --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Missing Dependency: test2 is needed by package test So, at least for the time being, would the best thing be to just make all the "optional" deps Requires as long as they don't cause ridiculous dep bloat? That's certainly my inclination. Tim From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 22:49:20 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:49:20 +0100 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:42:50 +0200." <1136832170.14319.23.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <200601092348.k09Nm8ga002802@mx2.redhat.com> ville.skytta at iki.fi said: > As far as I'm concerned, mkvtoolnix is not under review, it is waiting for > legal comments from someone. It has been changed to ASSIGNED automatically > by Bugzilla after I set it to NEEDINFO from NEW and the submitter replied to > it, and seems there's no way to "fix" that. Yes, my bad. Sorry about that. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 9 22:57:12 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:57:12 +0100 Subject: Tracker bug for packages from people searching for sponsors (Was: Re: Some BZ cleanups) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:04:38 EST." <604aa7910601091104t77bb387ra70c2fbc38c1fdcb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200601092355.k09NtfKN003505@mx2.redhat.com> jspaleta at gmail.com said: > You have the bug block against 2 trackers at the same time if we wanted all > the new request to show up in FE-NEW. The blocker bug entry takes a comma > seperated list of bugnumbers. So you could have a form for new submitters > which pre-filled both FE-NEW and NEED-SPONSOR in bugreports? Ah, good point. Didn't think of that. Either way is fine with me. > I think its something to bring up for steering committee agenda if enough > sponsors think it would help them deal with sponsorship request more > efficiently. Agreed, though I think it could also be useful for non-sponsors... to help avoid some confusions :-) Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 00:36:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:36:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100036.k0A0as6r028881@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-09 19:36 EST ------- It appears that the incompatibility between itcl3.3 and iwidgets was a build problem, not a runtime problem. I was able to test an iwidgets application with itcl3.3 with no problems. Starting with version 3.3, itk has been split of into a separate source archive. I'll submit itk 3.3 as a separate package shortly. Without further ado, here is the itcl 3.3 release candidate package: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl-3.3-0.1.RC1.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl.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 Tue Jan 10 00:40:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:40:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177359] New: Review Request: itk - object oriented extensions for Tk 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=177359 Summary: Review Request: itk - object oriented extensions for Tk Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wart at kobold.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itk.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itk-3.3-0.1.RC1.src.rpm Description: [incr Tk] is Tk extension that provides object-oriented features that are missing from the Tk extension to Tcl. The OO features provided by itk are useful for building megawidgets. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 01:11:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:11:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173035] Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100111.k0A1BQ5I002786@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173035 ------- Additional Comments From dwmw2 at redhat.com 2006-01-09 20:11 EST ------- Peter, I did answer your question on the mailing list, although the broken list Reply-To: settings mean that you didn't receive a direct copy of my mail -- it's '__powerpc__'. However, Thomas's suggestion is the correct answer. Please make it use standard C99 types, instead of the mess of hackish ifdefs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 01:15:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:15:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100115.k0A1FeFH003516@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 rc040203 at freenet.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |rc040203 at freenet.de OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-09 20:15 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 Tue Jan 10 01:25:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:25:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177206] Review Request: perl-Digest-MD2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100125.k0A1PC4b005811@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-MD2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177206 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpo at di.uminho.pt ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-09 20:25 EST ------- APPROVED MD5SUMS: a11394c48fe657c212d9117a0dc9ecef perl-Digest-MD2-2.03-1.src.rpm feecf9faa1b0a499a48fce214a309a78 Digest-MD2-2.03.tar.gz 7e6d5a4bf094a934fcaaa07e9ded7c05 perl-Digest-MD2.spec Sources: * Digest-MD2-2.03.tar.gz: MD5 digest verified against CPAN tarball Good: * URL and Source url are valid * License verified (main POD page and README file) * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * File permissions are correct * Builds without problems in FC-3 and FC-4 * (Un)installs without problems in FC3 and FC-4 * No opened tickets in http://rt.cpan.org/NoAuth/Bugs.html?Dist=Digest-MD2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 01:34:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:34:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169927] Review Request: scim-fcitx - Chinese IMEngine for SCIM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100134.k0A1Y2wE007527@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scim-fcitx - Chinese IMEngine for SCIM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169927 petersen at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From petersen at redhat.com 2006-01-09 20:33 EST ------- 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 mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 03:05:53 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:05:53 -0800 Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136862353.4773.19.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:36 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:13 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: > > > I believe that some other packaging systems have a > > way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, > > but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). > > It does in >= 4.4 (Suggests:, Enhances:, Requires(missingok), maybe > others (and maybe I don't remember the names accurately)) but I'm not > aware of any frontends which would support that functionality. Not sure > about plain rpm CLI. > Any idea where this is documented? I can't find it. If I can find it - I'd like to file an RFE with yum (for Suggests or Enhances) so I can use it. I Looked in ( /usr/share/doc/rpm-4.4.1) CHANGES dependencies spec and the man page, and didn't find it. From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 03:15:15 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:15:15 -0800 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136862916.4773.26.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:42 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > BTW, where is the problem if you "would rarely look through a > needs-sponsor bugs"? They need a sponsor for review, so if you're no > sponsor you can't do anything there in most cases anyway. Save time for > you, too. I can recommend changes etc. so that the package is closer to being a good package when a sponsor gets to it, thus saving the sponsor time. Also, if it results in a cleaner package, even if the user never is sponsored - it may be helpful to people searching for the package (as they'll have a cleaner src.rpm they can build from the bugzilla) That's my reasoning anyway. I've got a couple packages on my system built from non approved src.rpm's - because they provide something I want (not sure that currently is the case - I think the ones I did install have since been approved) From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 03:27:57 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:27:57 -0800 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:42 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Yeah, and the reverse (from a sponsors point of view) is exactly the > problem: The sponsor has to go though *all* bugs to find those waiting > for a sponsor. And that's a problem afaics because they (including me) > often don't do that. What if they still blocked FE-NEW but also blocked a sponsor bug? IE in wiki - instruct new packagers to add the sponsor bug to the blocks after submitting the package using the standard form? That should make both groups happy. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 04:51:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 23:51:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100451.k0A4pJcQ019539@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-09 23:51 EST ------- so actually if xmlto is added the docs are newly generated? i am not sure whats the best way to go there then. regenerate the docs to be sure they match and work properly... or use the prebuilt ones. just a thought ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 04:51:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 23:51:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174883] Review Request: distcc -- A free distributed C/C++ compiler system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100451.k0A4pun9019738@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-09 23:51 EST ------- just rebuilt the package fine on x86_64 rawhide. some comments: i am not sure if the initscript splitting makes sense really. it creates alot subpackages for not much gain. actually the initng script could maybe go directly upstream. just some thoughts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Tue Jan 10 06:45:14 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 22:45:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: <1136862353.4773.19.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136862353.4773.19.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:36 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: >> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:13 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: >> >>> I believe that some other packaging systems have a >>> way of specifying "suggested dependencies", which is what's needed here, >>> but RPM doesn't (unless I'm missing something). >> >> It does in >= 4.4 (Suggests:, Enhances:, Requires(missingok), maybe >> others (and maybe I don't remember the names accurately)) but I'm not >> aware of any frontends which would support that functionality. Not sure >> about plain rpm CLI. >> > > Any idea where this is documented? > I can't find it. > If I can find it - I'd like to file an RFE with yum (for Suggests or > Enhances) so I can use it. > > I Looked in ( /usr/share/doc/rpm-4.4.1) CHANGES dependencies spec > and the man page, and didn't find it. It's only in rpm >= 4.4.3, not earlier. See http://wraptastic.org/blog/?p=36#more-36 for the changelog. - Panu - From lmacken at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 07:28:58 2006 From: lmacken at redhat.com (Luke Macken) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:28:58 -0500 Subject: rpms/obby/FC-4 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 obby.spec, 1.6, 1.7 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <20060109124240.5cd9b515.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <200601040425.k044PmGY016895@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <20060109124240.5cd9b515.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060110072858.GA14534@tomservo.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 12:42:40PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: | On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 23:25:16 -0500, Luke Macken wrote: | | > Author: lmacken | > | > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/obby/FC-4 | > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv16874 | > | > Modified Files: | > .cvsignore obby.spec sources | > Log Message: | > 0.3.0 | | > -BuildRequires: net6-devel, gmp-devel, gettext-devel, howl-devel | > +BuildRequires: net6-devel, gmp-devel, gettext-devel, libsigc++ | | You either want libsigc++-devel or libsigc++20-devel I removed that dep all together, since it is fulfilled by net6-devel. Thanks! luke From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 07:36:43 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:36:43 -0800 Subject: Policy for Requires in spec files supporting optional features In-Reply-To: References: <42736.217.150.119.66.1136830430.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> <1136831785.14319.19.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136862353.4773.19.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136878604.4773.34.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 22:45 -0800, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > It's only in rpm >= 4.4.3, not earlier. See > http://wraptastic.org/blog/?p=36#more-36 for the changelog. Thanks. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 08:23:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 03:23:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177206] Review Request: perl-Digest-MD2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601100823.k0A8Napg031116@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Digest-MD2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177206 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-10 03:23 EST ------- Thanks for the view. Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at adslpipe.co.uk Tue Jan 10 09:10:13 2006 From: fedora at adslpipe.co.uk (Andy Burns) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:10:13 +0000 Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: <43C379F5.6050607@adslpipe.co.uk> Linus Walleij wrote: > AFAIK there is no clear rationale at all unless it someday comes out > of the Red Hat legal dept. Someone had a change of heart? http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/?p=159 From thomas at apestaart.org Tue Jan 10 10:40:15 2006 From: thomas at apestaart.org (Thomas Vander Stichele) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:40:15 +0100 Subject: gst-python and fc devel In-Reply-To: <1136811617.6229.18.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1136810976.3744.7.camel@otto> <1136811617.6229.18.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1136889616.3744.27.camel@otto> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 08:00 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 13:49 +0100, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: > > Since this is a little different from the normal import case, I'm asking > > here what I should do exactly in this case. Do I just import the > > gstreamer08-python package as a "new" package, and update the current > > gstreamer-python spec to the 0.10 version ? > > That's how I did it for sqlite2/sqlite. OK, thanks. I just add both to cvs, or should one of them or both of them go through a new review cycle ? Thomas Dave/Dina : future TV today ! - http://www.davedina.org/ <-*- thomas (dot) apestaart (dot) org -*-> If you don't ask me out to dinner I don't eat <-*- thomas (at) apestaart (dot) org -*-> URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.fm/ From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 10 11:07:00 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:37:00 +0330 Subject: Mono in Extras Message-ID: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> I guess we should somehow start packaging Mono and friends for FC4, and also look for interesting packages not in Core for FC4/5. No? roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 11:06:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 06:06:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175566] Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101106.k0AB6Np3006329@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175566 adrian at lisas.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From adrian at lisas.de 2006-01-10 06:06 EST ------- * builds in mock * clean installation and removal * source matches upstream * patch looks good * spec looks good * rpmlint is almost happy: W: kbibtex dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kbibtex/common /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common W: kbibtex symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kbibtex/common /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common APPROVED As soon as you are ready to be sponsored I will do 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 10 11:18:26 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:18:26 +0000 Subject: Mono in Extras In-Reply-To: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > I guess we should somehow start packaging Mono and friends for FC4, and > also look for interesting packages not in Core for FC4/5. > > No? Sounds like a plan. The problem is what the FC developers consider should be in extras and what is in core. For example, would monodoc and monodevelop be core or extras? Arguments can be made both ways. I seriously think though the MySQL connector from the MySQL website *needs* to be part of core as ByteFX really isn't very good. TTFN Paul -- main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0 Hi, I couldn't believe, but it seems to be true. Some days ago I updated yumex to Version: 0.44 Release: 1.0.fc4, but now happens something that is really unbelievable: If I try to refresh my lists my adsl router (a LadVision router with firmware ETHADSL_USB_080902_REL9) goes down! I've tried many times this action and every time the router goes down. This happens only if I use yumex; yum and kyum work well. Has somebody experienced a similar problem? ByE LuKe -- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Hai dei virus sul tuo PC ma non sai come eliminarli? Allora impara subito come rimuovere ogni tipo di virus - clicca qui Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=3211&d=10-1 From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 10 11:34:42 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:04:42 +0330 Subject: Mono in Extras In-Reply-To: <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1136892882.3189.33.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 11:18 +0000, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Sounds like a plan. The problem is what the FC developers consider > should be in extras and what is in core. For example, would monodoc and > monodevelop be core or extras? Arguments can be made both ways. We can ask them. If they want to ship it in Code, let them do that and don't get into arguments. If they don't, we can ship them in Extras. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 11:45:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 06:45:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101145.k0ABjbaJ016007@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 jamatos at fc.up.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-10 06:45 EST ------- Package built successfully in FC-4. It failed in FC-3 since gfortran is not available there and in devel because of xorg new packaging scheme. I will fix those 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 Tue Jan 10 12:03:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:03:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101203.k0AC30L6020256@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 rpm at greysector.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rpm at greysector.net ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-10 07:02 EST ------- Of course it is available. $ yum list '*fortran' [...] gcc4-gfortran.i386 4.0.0-0.41.fc3 updates-released Good to see this in 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 Tue Jan 10 13:10:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:10:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177401] New: Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV 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=177401 Summary: Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/clamsmtp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/clamsmtp-1.6-1.src.rpm Description: ClamSMTP is an SMTP filter that checks for viruses using ClamAV. It aims to be lightweight, reliable, and simple. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 13:41:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:41:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101341.k0ADfA1A008945@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-10 08:40 EST ------- The only difference that they should ever have is due to different stylesheets -- the make rules should guarantee that. But I supposed the package could pass "--disable-xml-docs" to avoid even trying. Opinions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 14:38:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:38:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177413] New: geda-gattrib - attribute editor for gEDA project 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=177413 Summary: geda-gattrib - attribute editor for gEDA project Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-gattrib.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-gattrib-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is an attribute editor for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It allows to edit attributes of symbols placed on circuit diagram. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 14:42:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:42:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177414] New: geda - project manager for gEDA project 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=177414 Summary: geda - project manager for gEDA project Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a project manager for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. It allows to launch several programs to create and process electronic circuit projects. This is my first group of package, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 14:48:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:48:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177415] New: geda-docs - documentation for gEDA project 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=177415 Summary: geda-docs - documentation for gEDA project Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-docs.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-docs-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This is a documentation for gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. This is my first group of packages, so I am seeking a sponsor. Rpmlint reports a problem with zero length file which I expect to be fixed with next release 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 Tue Jan 10 14:50:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:50:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177416] New: geda-examples - some examples for gEDA project 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=177416 Summary: geda-examples - some examples for gEDA project Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: wk at ire.pw.edu.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/specs/geda-examples.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.sp5pbe.waw.pl/~sp5smk/fedora-extras/srpms/geda-examples-20050820-2.fc4.src.rpm Description: This package contains some circuit examples gEDA project (http://wwww.geda.seul.org), for electrical circuit design. This is an auxiliary package. This is my first group of packages, so I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 15:04:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:04:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176026] Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101504.k0AF4FfA028897@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-10 10:04 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SPECS/pikdev.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SRPMS/pikdev-0.8.2-2.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jan 10 2006 Alain Portal 0.8.2-2 - Add the %{?dist} macro -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 15:04:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:04:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177401] Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101504.k0AF4wsC029073@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 rpm at timj.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rpm at timj.co.uk ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-01-10 10:04 EST ------- (NB I am not a reviewer, these are just comments) 1. BuildRoot should probably be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) 2. $rpm -ivh clamsmtp-1.6-1.i386.rpm Preparing... ########################################### [100%] 1:clamsmtp ########################################### [100%] error reading information on service clamsmtpd: No such device error: %post(clamsmtp-1.6-1.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 This is because the clamsmtpd init script is ending up in a subdirectory: $ls -ld /etc/init.d/clamsmtpd drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 10 14:37 /etc/init.d/clamsmtpd fix to the spec: 32c32 < %{__install} -d %{buildroot}%{_initrddir}/clamsmtpd --- > %{__install} -d %{buildroot}%{_initrddir} 3. rpmlint says: E: clamsmtp non-standard-gid /etc/clamsmtpd.conf clamav This is tricky. clamsmtp does require clamav, which creates the clamav user in its %post, but that seems a bit fragile in case the clamav package changes. Also, the "clamav" user in the clamav package owns the virus databases, so having daemons run as the same user is not a good idea. It would probably be better for the package to create its own "clamsmtp" user to run as and own the config. 4. W: clamsmtp no-reload-entry /etc/rc.d/init.d/clamsmtpd from "man clamsmtpd" it does not have a reload signal. W: clamsmtp incoherent-init-script-name clamsmtpd It would probably be better to rename this to "clamsmtp", to match the package name. Ditto the init file refers to "ClamSmtpd" which should perhaps be "clamsmtp" 4. I wonder if /etc/clamsmtpd.conf should be mode 0640 rather than 0644, for privacy? 5. the %doc "scripts/clamsmtpd.sh" can probably be removed, it seems to just be a crude init script. other than that, a few things I checked: - Naming looks OK - license is OK (BSD) - license in spec matches package - license is packaged in %doc - spec file is in en_US - spec is legible - source matches upstream - package builds - package superficially works (it runs) - ldconfig not necessary - no locales - no relocation - no directories created and therefore needing ownership - permissions look ok - %clean is present - package uses macros - %doc is docs. scripts/virus_action.sh is an example, so that's OK. - scriptlets look sane, with Requires(post) and (postun) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From lists at timj.co.uk Tue Jan 10 15:18:25 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:18:25 -0000 (GMT) Subject: alterMIME license Message-ID: <46201.217.150.119.66.1136906305.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> The license for alterMIME: http://www.pldaniels.com/altermime/ is basically a BSD license but has been tweaked slightly by the author (in fairly unexciting ways that don't fundamentally change the drift of it as far as I can see; it doesn't add any restrictions that would impact FE users) The license is not listed explicitly on gnu.org/opensource.org. As it stands, is this a candidate for FE under the BSD license, or would it need to be explicitly approved as open source/GPL-compatible by opensource.org/GNU? Thanks, Tim From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 15:32:14 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:32:14 -0600 Subject: alterMIME license In-Reply-To: <46201.217.150.119.66.1136906305.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> References: <46201.217.150.119.66.1136906305.squirrel@webmail.firecluster.net> Message-ID: <1136907135.19767.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 15:18 +0000, Tim Jackson wrote: > The license for alterMIME: > > http://www.pldaniels.com/altermime/ > > is basically a BSD license but has been tweaked slightly by the author (in > fairly unexciting ways that don't fundamentally change the drift of it as > far as I can see; it doesn't add any restrictions that would impact FE > users) > > The license is not listed explicitly on gnu.org/opensource.org. > > As it stands, is this a candidate for FE under the BSD license, or would > it need to be explicitly approved as open source/GPL-compatible by > opensource.org/GNU? It's BSD, no restrictive clauses. I approve that LICENSE for Fedora Extras. ~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 jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Jan 10 14:25:59 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:25:59 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> On 1/9/06, Michael A. Peters wrote: > IE in wiki - instruct new packagers to add the sponsor bug to the blocks > after submitting the package using the standard form? Go a little further, like Roozbeh suggested, build a different cookie-cutter bugzilla form for new submittors which pre-fills both blockers. Hand new submitters the url link they need such that all they need to do is fill in the description and summary and let the formpage fill in the blockers appropriately. We already have a different wikipage for new submittors and existing contributors... we just need a slightly different bugzilla form page to drop a review request in for new submittors. -jef From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Tue Jan 10 16:35:07 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:35:07 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136910907.20552.1.camel@ignacio.lan> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:25 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > we > just need a slightly different bugzilla form page to drop a review > request in for new submittors. Can't it be detected from the address that they use to submit the review request? -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 16:50:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:50:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101650.k0AGoWjJ023540@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-10 11:50 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.3-2): - removed trac.fcgi (comment #11) - removed tracd man page - added extra % to pythonlib in changelog Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.3-2.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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 10 17:13:37 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:43:37 +0330 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1136910907.20552.1.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> <1136910907.20552.1.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1136913217.3189.91.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 11:35 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > Can't it be detected from the address that they use to submit the review > request? You mean from the HTTP header that mentions the page that linked to some page? roozbeh From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 18:11:36 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:11:36 -0600 Subject: Mono package policy Message-ID: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> As some of you may have noticed, mono (and packages depending on mono) recently went into Fedora Core Rawhide. (Please don't ask me about the why or how this happened, I'm not the right person) The packaging policy for mono (and packages depending on mono) in Fedora Extras for the moment is: - that packages depending on mono will only be for development (FC-5) at this time - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 until FC-5 goes GOLD. This policy is designed to get the kinks out of mono before we go full-steam ahead in FC-3/FC-4 (also, an rpm errata for FC-3/FC-4 would be needed). ~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 triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 10 18:12:34 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:12:34 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wine c.f. Mono In-Reply-To: <43C379F5.6050607@adslpipe.co.uk> References: <43B6C1F8.6050106@adslpipe.co.uk> <43C379F5.6050607@adslpipe.co.uk> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Andy Burns wrote: > Linus Walleij wrote: > >> AFAIK there is no clear rationale at all unless it someday comes out of >> the Red Hat legal dept. > > Someone had a change of heart? > http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/?p=159 Yeah it's obviously pushed into Core devel at: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/Fedora/RPMS/ That totally rocks... Can someone explain the new policy, or is it simply "we wanted so badly we figured we could live with Mono"? ;-) Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 18:40:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:40:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173035] Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101840.k0AIe3OQ017072@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173035 ------- Additional Comments From lemenkov at newmail.ru 2006-01-10 13:39 EST ------- > Peter, I did answer your question on the mailing list, although the broken list > Reply-To: settings mean that you didn't receive a direct copy of my mail -- it's > '__powerpc__'. Thanks. Builds fine now. > However, Thomas's suggestion is the correct answer. Please make it use standard > C99 types, instead of the mess of hackish ifdefs. I'll send e-mail to the developer of chmlib ASAP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 18:44:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:44:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101844.k0AIioOB018276@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-10 13:44 EST ------- More comments about this package ? Domeone could do a formal review now ? 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 rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 10 19:01:08 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:01:08 +0100 Subject: Mono package policy In-Reply-To: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136919668.18780.115.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > As some of you may have noticed, mono (and packages depending on mono) > recently went into Fedora Core Rawhide. (Please don't ask me about the > why or how this happened, I'm not the right person) Then let me use this opportunity to ask those who are the RIGHT PERSONS on what has caused this change in RH's attitude towards mono. I think not only the Fedora community is longing for somebody RH to elaborate. It would be a matter of fairness towards the Fedora Extra community, IMHO. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 19:14:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:14:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101914.k0AJENXt025551@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From Jochen at herr-schmitt.de 2006-01-10 14:14 EST ------- > 1. /usr/bin/gst contains a invalid rpath. Added --disable-rpath > 2. Disable building the static libs. Added --enable-static=no > 3. Many of the *st scripts in /usr/share carry a broken SHEBANG and broken > permissions. I have fixed the boken shebangs. If a *.st file have a shebang, a+x will be set. > 4. Please explain the purpose of the *-am.patch. > In its core, the package renames the package (comprising the tarball's name!) > and should not be applied. IMO this patch should not be applied. I must refer you to comment #3 of this bug. The debian guys have change the package name in the same way. I think, that a directory should be better named /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk instead of '/usr/share/smalltalk'. > 5. make check should be moved to %check Done. download: SrPM: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/gnu-smalltalk/gnu-smalltalk-2.2-6.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/gnu-smalltalk/gnu-smalltalk.spec Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 19:24:16 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:24:16 +0100 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:43:37 +0330." <1136913217.3189.91.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <200601101924.k0AJOSIO021986@mx1.redhat.com> roozbeh at farsiweb.info said: > You mean from the HTTP header that mentions the page that linked to some > page? No, the "Reporter" field of the BZ ticket, which won't be in the list of sponsored people in case the submitter needs a sponsor. I like the idea. Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 19:32:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:32:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171289] Review Request: dirmngr: Client for Managing/Downloading CRLs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101932.k0AJWals029528@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|ville.skytta at iki.fi |gdk at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-10 14:32 EST ------- Back to FE-NEW due to lack of time and info. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 19:54:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:54:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601101954.k0AJs9Y6002189@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-10 14:54 EST ------- For FC-3 I get Job failed on arch x86_64 ... No Package Found for gcc-gfortran -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Jan 10 19:59:02 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:59:02 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <200601101924.k0AJOSIO021986@mx1.redhat.com> References: <1136913217.3189.91.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <200601101924.k0AJOSIO021986@mx1.redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910601101159p17c81dedue7416741cee1b3b8@mail.gmail.com> On 1/10/06, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > roozbeh at farsiweb.info said: > > You mean from the HTTP header that mentions the page that linked to some > > page? > > No, the "Reporter" field of the BZ ticket, which won't be in the list of > sponsored people in case the submitter needs a sponsor. > > I like the idea. Assuming its technically possible to implement in bugzilla. It depends on if bugzilla knows with accuracy that someone already has sponsorship status or not. Which may or may not be true. -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 20:07:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:07:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601102007.k0AK7334004663@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 katzj at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |katzj at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From katzj at redhat.com 2006-01-10 15:06 EST ------- A few questions/comments before doing a full review: 1) What's the purpose of the section define at the top of the spec file? I'm assuming it's somehow related to jpackage... 2) We tend to avoid doing, eg, jpp or the like in release tags 3) Using %{summary}. for summaries is odd -- that doesn't describe what the purpose of the subpackage is. Also, you'll end up with double periods like that 4) You shouldn't need the javadoc %postun as that should get handled by the fact that the file is ghosted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 20:07:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:07:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601102007.k0AK7Vmn004743@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-10 15:07 EST ------- (In reply to comment #42) > No Package Found for gcc-gfortran Read comment 41 again :). It's gcc4-gfortran, not gcc-gfortran on FC3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 10 20:12:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:12:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601102012.k0AKCM1g005442@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-10 15:12 EST ------- I see you've updated to 0.41, any particular reason why it's not posted here 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 20:30:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601102030.k0AKUqSQ008082@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at soeterbroek.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-10 15:30 EST ------- - Applied patch (id=123008) - rpmlint clean - imported - built successfully in plague (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 jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu Tue Jan 10 20:38:06 2006 From: jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu (Jack Neely) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:38:06 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 11:31:03PM +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 16:00 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > And with the next release of Core the userland-package probably needs to > > be dropped cause all parts (udev rules for example) often are a part of > > core then. The question is: what obsoletes the package so it gets > > removed? fedora-release? > > Shouldn't kmod packages should have a dependency on the userland one and > it thus be pruned the usual way when old kernels get removed eg. through > yum's "installonlyn" plugin? BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176257 > Having kmod package depend on the userland packages can cause problems. I see that the rpm macro does set this up currently. If I push out a new kernel, openafs version, and new kmod the old kmod is not removed and requires a lesser version of openafs. We have a dependency conflict. Is this something that the installonlyn or kernel-module plugin in Yum will handle? What about the philosophy of having a known good kernel as a backup? Jack Neely -- Jack Neely Campus Linux Services Project Lead PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 10 20:46:29 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:46:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060110204629.CDB688012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 17 R-2.2.1-3.fc3 gxemul-0.3.7-1.fc3 perl-CGI-Untaint-date-1.00-1.fc3 perl-Class-Accessor-0.22-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-FromCGI-1.00-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.07-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-SQLite-0.11-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-mysql-1.00-1.fc3 perl-Class-Data-Inheritable-0.04-1.fc3 perl-Class-Trigger-0.10-1.fc3 perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.09-2.fc3 perl-Digest-MD4-1.5-1.fc3 perl-Ima-DBI-0.34-1.fc3 perl-Image-ExifTool-5.89-1.fc3 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.15-1.fc3 pychart-1.39-3.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 Tue Jan 10 20:51:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:51:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060110205157.622CF8012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 24 R-2.2.1-3.fc4 apcupsd-3.12.1-1.fc4 geos-2.2.1-1 grace-5.1.18-7.fc4 gxemul-0.3.7-1.fc4 moodle-1.5.3-2.fc4 obby-0.3.0-3.fc4 perl-CGI-Untaint-date-1.00-1.fc4 perl-Class-Accessor-0.22-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-FromCGI-1.00-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.07-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-SQLite-0.11-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-mysql-1.00-1.fc4 perl-Class-Data-Inheritable-0.04-1.fc4 perl-Class-Trigger-0.10-1.fc4 perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.09-2.fc4 perl-Digest-MD4-1.5-1.fc4 perl-Ima-DBI-0.34-1.fc4 perl-Image-ExifTool-5.89-1.fc4 perl-SQL-Statement-1.14-1.fc4 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.15-1.fc4 pychart-1.39-2.fc4 pychart-1.39-3.fc4 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 Tue Jan 10 21:01:42 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:01:42 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 10.01.2006, 15:38 -0500 schrieb Jack Neely: > On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 11:31:03PM +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 16:00 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > And with the next release of Core the userland-package probably needs to > > > be dropped cause all parts (udev rules for example) often are a part of > > > core then. The question is: what obsoletes the package so it gets > > > removed? fedora-release? > > > > Shouldn't kmod packages should have a dependency on the userland one and > > it thus be pruned the usual way when old kernels get removed eg. through > > yum's "installonlyn" plugin? BTW, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176257 > > > > Having kmod package depend on the userland packages can cause problems. > I see that the rpm macro does set this up currently. > > If I push out a new kernel, openafs version, and new kmod the old kmod > is not removed and requires a lesser version of openafs. We have a > dependency conflict. The newer userland-package probably won't work with the old kernel-version anyway. But the question is correct: how do we solve this? IMHO the plugin should uninstall older kernel-modules. Or should a package "kmod-foo-1.2-1.2.6.14-1.1776_FC4" simply have a Obsolets: kmod-foo < 1.2 Would yum in this case uninstall the older versions during update (normally kmod-packages are installed and not updated, but in this case we want it to update)? /me wonders how long it will take until Ralf will say "Rebuild for all known kernels"; maybe he is right in this aspect. But the problem needs to be solved anyway. > Is this something that the installonlyn or kernel-module plugin in Yum > will handle? What about the philosophy of having a known good kernel as > a backup? This afaik is a philosophy of having a known good kernel as a backup *that at least boots the system*. That should be no problem because kernel-modules in extras normally are not boot-critical. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 10 21:03:52 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:03:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060110210352.79EA98012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 24 R-2.2.1-3.fc5 apcupsd-3.12.1-1.fc5 chmlib-0.37.4-4.fc5 clamav-0.88-1.fc5 gnome-applet-netspeed-0.13-4.fc5 gxemul-0.3.7-1.fc5 moodle-1.5.3-2.fc5 obby-0.3.0-2.fc5 perl-CGI-Untaint-date-1.00-1.fc5 perl-Class-Accessor-0.22-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-FromCGI-1.00-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.07-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-SQLite-0.11-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-mysql-1.00-1.fc5 perl-Class-Data-Inheritable-0.04-1.fc5 perl-Class-Trigger-0.10-1.fc5 perl-Digest-MD2-2.03-1.fc5 perl-Ima-DBI-0.34-1.fc5 perl-Image-ExifTool-5.89-1.fc5 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.15-1.fc5 pychart-1.39-2.fc5 pychart-1.39-3.fc5 trac-0.9.3-2.fc5 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 Jan 10 21:14:20 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:14:20 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910601101314n6ff92f3dk5644f294f3803019@mail.gmail.com> On 1/10/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > This afaik is a philosophy of having a known good kernel as a backup > *that at least boots the system*. That should be no problem because > kernel-modules in extras normally are not boot-critical. Is "normally" good enough? I don't think we can assume that all mods in Extras won't be boot-critical by design, nor can we assume that people using a module won't find its boot-critical for them. If someone is "abnormally" using a kernel module from Extras that is boot-critical for them.. shouldn't there be a mechanism available to the local admin to override the "normal" removal that would happen for that specific kernel module? We are talking about hardware level support here... i don't think "normal" can be the defining standard. -jef"if it were normal.. it'd be in the mainline"spaleta From paul at city-fan.org Tue Jan 10 21:32:50 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: rpms/perl-Module-Build/FC-4 .cvsignore, 1.7, 1.8 perl-Module-Build.spec, 1.11, 1.12 sources, 1.7, 1.8 In-Reply-To: <200601102114.k0ALEsL8031766@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601102114.k0ALEsL8031766@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1136928770.28269.29.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote: > +perldoc -t perlgpl > COPYING > +perldoc -t perlartistic > Artistic ... > %files > %defattr(-,root,root,-) > -%doc Changes README > +%doc Changes README COPYING Artistic ... > %changelog > +* Mon Sep 05 2005 Steven Pritchard - 0.2611-2 > +- Minor spec cleanup. > +- Add COPYING and Artistic. You know the guidelines were changed and it's no longer required to include the license text if upstream don't include it, right? Paul. From jpmahowald at gmail.com Tue Jan 10 21:34:45 2006 From: jpmahowald at gmail.com (John Mahowald) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:34:45 -0600 Subject: yumex kills my router! In-Reply-To: <43C39C2F.10808@email.it> References: <43C39C2F.10808@email.it> Message-ID: <3ea997540601101334i12eafe7dlfd4341818d295180@mail.gmail.com> On 1/10/06, lk wrote: > Hi, > > I couldn't believe, but it seems to be true. > Some days ago I updated yumex to Version: 0.44 Release: 1.0.fc4, > but now happens something that is really unbelievable: > If I try to refresh my lists my adsl router (a LadVision router with > firmware ETHADSL_USB_080902_REL9) goes down! > I've tried many times this action and every time the router goes down. > This happens only if I use yumex; yum and kyum work well. > > Has somebody experienced a similar problem? > > ByE > > LuKe > fedora-list is a a better place to ask this, this list is for discussing work on extras packages. Regards, John From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 21:43:56 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:43:56 -0800 Subject: Mono package policy In-Reply-To: <1136919668.18780.115.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136919668.18780.115.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136929437.17436.49.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:01 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > As some of you may have noticed, mono (and packages depending on mono) > > recently went into Fedora Core Rawhide. (Please don't ask me about the > > why or how this happened, I'm not the right person) > > Then let me use this opportunity to ask those who are the RIGHT PERSONS > on what has caused this change in RH's attitude towards mono. > > I think not only the Fedora community is longing for somebody RH to > elaborate. It would be a matter of fairness towards the Fedora Extra > community, IMHO. I'm guessing what it boils down to is business. If the risk of needing to pull it in the future is outweighed by the demand from the business sector, that may have been the reason for the change. I'm guessing when the discussion last went on, some people @redhat knew it was a strong possibility but weren't allowed to say anything until the final decision had been made. It would be interesting to know who and why though. From jpmahowald at gmail.com Tue Jan 10 21:44:35 2006 From: jpmahowald at gmail.com (John Mahowald) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 15:44:35 -0600 Subject: Required information In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3ea997540601101344r91520eg2dc7e4d0b74bb6b2@mail.gmail.com> On 1/7/06, nadeem LION wrote: > > > > how we can modify source code of fedora to test anaconda messages in our > native language. > > anaconda-devel-list may be more helpful. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list Regards, John From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 10 21:51:08 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:51:08 -0800 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> References: <200601091735.k09HZo5p003086@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1136831166.4773.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1136832166.3461.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136863678.4773.29.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601100625y1264cce3q61d270f258e6e7c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136929869.17436.52.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:25 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/9/06, Michael A. Peters wrote: > > IE in wiki - instruct new packagers to add the sponsor bug to the blocks > > after submitting the package using the standard form? > > Go a little further, like Roozbeh suggested, build a different > cookie-cutter bugzilla form for new submittors which pre-fills both > blockers. Hand new submitters the url link they need such that all > they need to do is fill in the description and summary and let the > formpage fill in the blockers appropriately. We already have a > different wikipage for new submittors and existing contributors... we > just need a slightly different bugzilla form page to drop a review > request in for new submittors. If this is implemented - I volunteer to do some monkey work and go through the FE-NEW bugs, finding any that state they need a sponsor and adding the blocker # to the sponsor bug. As long I get some bananas. From jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu Tue Jan 10 22:02:44 2006 From: jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu (Jack Neely) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:02:44 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136564191.3146.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060106155542.GC2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1136564191.3146.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060110220244.GP2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Folks, Built and tested the OpenAFS specs. I did make some changes to the openafs-init.sh file so it knew where to find the module. http://linuxczar.net/openafs/ Jack -- Jack Neely Campus Linux Services Project Lead PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 10 22:06:17 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:06:17 +0100 Subject: Mono package policy In-Reply-To: <1136929437.17436.49.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136919668.18780.115.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1136929437.17436.49.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1136930777.18780.195.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 13:43 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:01 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > As some of you may have noticed, mono (and packages depending on mono) > > > recently went into Fedora Core Rawhide. (Please don't ask me about the > > > why or how this happened, I'm not the right person) > > > > Then let me use this opportunity to ask those who are the RIGHT PERSONS > > on what has caused this change in RH's attitude towards mono. > > > > I think not only the Fedora community is longing for somebody RH to > > elaborate. It would be a matter of fairness towards the Fedora Extra > > community, IMHO. > > I'm guessing what it boils down to is business. I am inclined to agree, but ... Fedora is supposed to be a community driven project, ... so ... there would be a series of not necessarily comfortable questions to ask related to this decision. > If the risk of needing to pull it in the future is outweighed by the > demand from the business sector, that may have been the reason for the > change. > > I'm guessing when the discussion last went on, some people @redhat knew > it was a strong possibility but weren't allowed to say anything until > the final decision had been made. > > It would be interesting to know who and why though. IMO, it is essential for FE contributors to know. In particular, wrt. the legal aspects RH people were emphasizing in the past. What has suddenly voided them? Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 10 22:05:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:05:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601102205.k0AM5AMd024591@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-10 17:04 EST ------- I had some duplicate build requires: zlib-devel, libjpeg-devel and libpng-devel are provided by by gd-devel http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-10.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 Wed Jan 11 00:08:07 2006 From: mfleming at enlartenment.com (Michael Fleming) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:08:07 +1000 Subject: Mono in Extras In-Reply-To: <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060111000807.GA4885@enlartenment.com> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:18:26AM +0000, Paul F. Johnson waffled thusly: > Hi, > > > I guess we should somehow start packaging Mono and friends for FC4, and > > also look for interesting packages not in Core for FC4/5. > > > > No? > > Sounds like a plan. The problem is what the FC developers consider > should be in extras and what is in core. For example, would monodoc and > monodevelop be core or extras? Arguments can be made both ways. > > I seriously think though the MySQL connector from the MySQL website > *needs* to be part of core as ByteFX really isn't very good. I'll add a +1 for the MySQL connector. (We have customers using it in a .NET/Windows environment too and it works pretty well) The author of the ByteFX connector was hired by MySQL AB IIRC, and the MySQL connector itself is based on this code. I'd consider the ByteFX version comatose if not completely dead. :-) > TTFN Cheers, Michael. > Paul -- Michael Fleming "Bother" said the Borg, "We've assimilated Pooh!" From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 01:00:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:00:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] New: Review Request: subversion-api-docs 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=177483 Summary: Review Request: subversion-api-docs Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: bojan at rexursive.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/fedora-extras/subversion-api-docs.spec SRPM Name or Url: N/A Description: Subversion is a concurrent version control system which enables one or more users to collaborate in developing and maintaining a hierarchy of files and directories while keeping a history of all changes. This package provides Subversion API documentation for developers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 01:02:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 20:02:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110102.k0B12RDL018731@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-10 20:02 EST ------- This is in relation to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177063 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 01:20:48 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:20:48 +0000 Subject: Mono in Extras In-Reply-To: <20060111000807.GA4885@enlartenment.com> References: <1136891220.3189.23.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1136891906.5303.41.camel@T7.Linux> <20060111000807.GA4885@enlartenment.com> Message-ID: <1136942448.8335.15.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > I'll add a +1 for the MySQL connector. (We have customers using it in a > .NET/Windows environment too and it works pretty well) And yesterday, I found a lovely bug in the .net connector - it won't connect. TTFN Paul -- main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0 References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136919668.18780.115.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136945023.3093.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:01 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > As some of you may have noticed, mono (and packages depending on mono) > > recently went into Fedora Core Rawhide. (Please don't ask me about the > > why or how this happened, I'm not the right person) > > Then let me use this opportunity to ask those who are the RIGHT PERSONS > on what has caused this change in RH's attitude towards mono. > > I think not only the Fedora community is longing for somebody RH to > elaborate. It would be a matter of fairness towards the Fedora Extra > community, IMHO. Chris Blizzard (blizzard@) Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 02:44:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:44:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110244.k0B2iqVW031827@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-10 21:44 EST ------- Done. I also found some additional files in need of iconv help, and the package now properly owns %(python_sitearch}/xmldiff as well. SPEC: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff.spec SRPM: http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/rpm/extras-testing/xmldiff/xmldiff-0.6.7-4.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 Wed Jan 11 02:45:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:45:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110245.k0B2jsj4031877@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-10 21:45 EST ------- Sent e-mail to author of nucleo for guidence roussel at lri.fr -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From admin at ramshacklestudios.com Wed Jan 11 03:45:32 2006 From: admin at ramshacklestudios.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:45:32 -0800 Subject: yumex kills my router! In-Reply-To: <3ea997540601101334i12eafe7dlfd4341818d295180@mail.gmail.com> References: <43C39C2F.10808@email.it> <3ea997540601101334i12eafe7dlfd4341818d295180@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1136951132.4445.4.camel@tuxhugger> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 15:34 -0600, John Mahowald wrote: > On 1/10/06, lk wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I couldn't believe, but it seems to be true. > > Some days ago I updated yumex to Version: 0.44 Release: 1.0.fc4, > > but now happens something that is really unbelievable: > > If I try to refresh my lists my adsl router (a LadVision router with > > firmware ETHADSL_USB_080902_REL9) goes down! > > I've tried many times this action and every time the router goes down. > > This happens only if I use yumex; yum and kyum work well. > > > > Has somebody experienced a similar problem? > > > > ByE > > > > LuKe > > > > fedora-list is a a better place to ask this, this list is for > discussing work on extras packages. Erm. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but YumEx *is* part of Fedora Extras... -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7 -------------- 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 Jan 11 03:53:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:53:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171597] Review Request: spandsp - A DSP library for telephony In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110353.k0B3rKrb009435@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-10 22:53 EST ------- Aurelian... Can you take another look at this package? It's been sitting here for a while 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 Wed Jan 11 06:41:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110641.k0B6fPvD031790@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-11 01:41 EST ------- Well the FC-4 branch built OK and geos now shows up in the FC4 repository, but the devel build failed with the following errors: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../source/headers -I../../source/headers/geos -I../../source/headers -DGEOS_VERSION=2.2.1 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -c Coordinate.cpp -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/Coordinate.o ../../source/headers/geos/geom.h:361: error: extra qualification 'geos::Coordinate::' on member 'setNull' ../../source/headers/geos/geom.h:367: error: extra qualification 'geos::Coordinate::' on member 'getNull' ../../source/headers/geos/geom.h:371: error: extra qualification 'geos::Coordinate::' on member 'Coordinate' ... and so on Anyone know what would cause problems in devel that don't show in FC4? There are differences in the compiler flags and I assume that the g++ compiler is a newer version than in FC4. However I thought I'd see if this is a known issue before I dig in any try to resolve 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 Jan 11 07:36:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 02:36:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110736.k0B7aSOu006330@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-11 02:36 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > the devel build failed with the following errors: > Anyone know what would cause problems in devel that don't show in FC4? gcc-4.1 errors out on bad c++ code that gcc-4.0 had silently swallowed. > However I thought I'd see if this is a known issue It is. GCC-4.1 dislikes constructs like this: class MyClass { int MyClass::method(...); } and wants class MyClass { int method(...); } 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 08:22:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:22:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110822.k0B8MF0l012982@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-11 03:21 EST ------- Smart guy. =). Set to 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 Wed Jan 11 08:34:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:34:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601110834.k0B8Y098015315@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-11 03:33 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Smart guy. =). Set to FE-ACCEPT. Maybe it's just me, but I can hardly call that a *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 Wed Jan 11 11:03:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177504] New: Review Request: altermime 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=177504 Summary: Review Request: altermime Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at timj.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/altermime.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/altermime-0.3.6-1.src.rpm Description: altermime, as its name suggests, allows the altering of MIME-encoded Internet mail messages, to strip certain attachments or add disclaimers. It is a small, compact program which does not contain any networking functionality but works on piped data. License approved by tcallawa as per https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-January/msg00583.html tested: - builds in FC5 mock - rpmlint says nothing -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 11:21:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:21:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177507] New: Review Request: pida 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=177507 Summary: Review Request: pida Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: che666 at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com the python integrated development application for review. also looking for a sponsor. ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-11 06:21 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=123047) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=123047&action=view) pida 0.2.2-0.1 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 Wed Jan 11 11:31:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:31:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175566] Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111131.k0BBVtdQ012591@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175566 ------- Additional Comments From ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de 2006-01-11 06:31 EST ------- I am ready to be sponsored. I have added a membership request for cvsextras to my user-account 'noltec'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 12:28:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:28:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111228.k0BCSQ1e022595@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 jorton at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jorton at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2006-01-11 07:28 EST ------- It would perhaps be simpler to just generate the docs from /usr/include/subversion-1 to avoid having to run configure and package whole tarball again; would just need a copy of the doxygen.conf from upstream and the doxygen invocation from the Makefile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 12:29:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:29:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177065] Ownership of texmf/doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111229.k0BCT67s022796@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Ownership of texmf/doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177065 ------- Additional Comments From jnovy at redhat.com 2006-01-11 07:28 EST ------- There's no problem to move ownership for /usr/share/texmf/doc to tetex instead of tetex-doc. I agree with this change, it looks reasonable. However I don't think that even the subdirectories should be under the original tetex package. I'll look at the directory priorities. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 12:33:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:33:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177511] New: Review Request: mysql-connector-net 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=177511 Summary: Review Request: mysql-connector-net Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-1.src.rpm Description: mysql-connector-net is a direct replacement for ByteFX.Data as shipped with mono (it is suggested by the Mono people to use m-c-n over ByteFX.Data as it is no longer being developed, though it is being bug fixed) The current spec file works fine on x86 based machines, but due to a problem with the current rpms on other architectures, it is not guaranteed to compile -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 12:33:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:33:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] New: Review Request: mysql-connector-net 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=177512 Summary: Review Request: mysql-connector-net Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-1.src.rpm Description: mysql-connector-net is a direct replacement for ByteFX.Data as shipped with mono (it is suggested by the Mono people to use m-c-n over ByteFX.Data as it is no longer being developed, though it is being bug fixed) The current spec file works fine on x86 based machines, but due to a problem with the current rpms on other architectures, it is not guaranteed to compile -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 14:53:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:53:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177065] Ownership of texmf/doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111453.k0BErPxn012988@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Ownership of texmf/doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177065 jnovy at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From jnovy at redhat.com 2006-01-11 09:53 EST ------- /usr/share/texmf/doc now belongs to tetex package. TEXMFLOCAL is now searched before TEXMFMAIN. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From somlo at cmu.edu Wed Jan 11 15:43:25 2006 From: somlo at cmu.edu (Gabriel L. Somlo) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:43:25 -0500 Subject: Fedora Account ? Message-ID: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> I have an approved first submission (for the wmx window manager, bug # 175844). The instructions for becoming an extras contributor (at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors) say that after applying for a new fedora account, I'd be emailed instructions to sign the CLA, after which I could add myself to cvsextras and proceed from there. I applied for an account a week or so ago, but haven't heard back about the CLA. Is it typical for the CLA instructions to take this long, or have I screwed up something along the way ? From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Jan 11 15:56:25 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:56:25 -0600 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? Message-ID: My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be running low on disk space: Job failed on arch ppc Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2804-digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5/ ------------------------------------------------- installing package libmng-devel-1.0.9-3.1 needs 142MB on the /mnt/build filesystem installing package openssl-devel-0.9.8a-5 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build filesystem installing package libmng-1.0.9-3.1 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build filesystem ... From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Jan 11 15:54:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:54:37 +0100 Subject: Buildsystem unstable? Message-ID: <1136994877.18780.242.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Hi, I am observing weird build failures for FC4-build requests: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-4-extras/2795-perl-File-Remove-0.31-1.fc4/ For another package, I had observed a similar error, but there requeuing the same build job had let the build job succeed. AFAIS, all failed build jobs had been processed on ppc1.fedora.redhat.com, while the successful one were processed on hammer1.fedora.redhat.com. Therefore, I'd guess ppc1 to be unstable. Ralf From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 15:55:02 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:25:02 +0530 Subject: Fedora Account ? In-Reply-To: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> References: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> Message-ID: <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: >I have an approved first submission (for the wmx window manager, bug # >175844). > >The instructions for becoming an extras contributor (at >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors) say that after >applying for a new fedora account, I'd be emailed instructions to sign >the CLA, after which I could add myself to cvsextras and proceed from >there. > >I applied for an account a week or so ago, but haven't heard back >about the CLA. > >Is it typical for the CLA instructions to take this long, or have I >screwed up something along the way ? > > > You should get the instructions immediately. Try again? -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 15:52:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:52:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177511] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111552.k0BFqDrI024416@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=177511 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 2006-01-11 10:52 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 177512 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 15:52:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:52:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111552.k0BFqMvn024478@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-11 10:52 EST ------- *** Bug 177511 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 Wed Jan 11 16:05:48 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:05:48 -0600 Subject: Buildsystem unstable? In-Reply-To: <1136994877.18780.242.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136994877.18780.242.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: Ralf Corsepius wrote: > I am observing weird build failures for FC4-build requests: ... > AFAIS, all failed build jobs had been processed on > ppc1.fedora.redhat.com, while the successful one were processed on > hammer1.fedora.redhat.com. > > Therefore, I'd guess ppc1 to be unstable. The ppc buildhost appears to be running low on disk space. -- Rex From ville.skytta at iki.fi Wed Jan 11 16:28:57 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:28:57 +0200 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1136996937.4322.18.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:56 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be > running low on disk space: And BTW, the sizes below seem pretty much bogus. 151MB for libmng? > Job failed on arch ppc > Build logs may be found at > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2804-digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5/ > ------------------------------------------------- > installing package libmng-devel-1.0.9-3.1 needs 142MB on the > /mnt/build filesystem > installing package openssl-devel-0.9.8a-5 needs 151MB on the > /mnt/build filesystem > installing package libmng-1.0.9-3.1 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build > filesystem > ... From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Jan 11 16:44:10 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:44:10 +0100 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? In-Reply-To: <1136996937.4322.18.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136996937.4322.18.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1136997850.18780.253.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 18:28 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:56 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be > > running low on disk space: > > And BTW, the sizes below seem pretty much bogus. 151MB for libmng? No, these are yum's/rpm's sizes of accumulated "required diskspace" when it tries to add another package. I.e. when trying to add libmng-devel to the rpm transaction, yum/rpm has detected that 142MB were missing to install all packages it wants to install so far. You get the same error messages when running out of disk space during ordinary yum installs. > > Job failed on arch ppc > > Build logs may be found at > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2804-digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5/ > > ------------------------------------------------- > > installing package libmng-devel-1.0.9-3.1 needs 142MB on the > > /mnt/build filesystem > > installing package openssl-devel-0.9.8a-5 needs 151MB on the > > /mnt/build filesystem > > installing package libmng-1.0.9-3.1 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build > > filesystem > > ... Ralf From dcbw at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 16:45:56 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:45:56 -0500 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1136997956.26502.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:56 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be > running low on disk space: > > Job failed on arch ppc > Build logs may be found at > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2804-digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5/ > ------------------------------------------------- > installing package libmng-devel-1.0.9-3.1 needs 142MB on the > /mnt/build filesystem > installing package openssl-devel-0.9.8a-5 needs 151MB on the > /mnt/build filesystem > installing package libmng-1.0.9-3.1 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build > filesystem > ... Fixing now... It might be a bit (say, an hour) before ppc1 is back up. Dan From lists at timj.co.uk Wed Jan 11 17:02:31 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:02:31 +0000 Subject: Fedora Account ? In-Reply-To: <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> References: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:25:02 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > >Is it typical for the CLA instructions to take this long, or have I > >screwed up something along the way ? > You should get the instructions immediately. Try again? I didn't get the CLA stuff either. However, it worked OK when I went to https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/send-cla.cgi and requested it to be sent to me manually. Is this a documentation problem perhaps? Tim From ville.skytta at iki.fi Wed Jan 11 17:12:17 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:12:17 +0200 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? In-Reply-To: <1136997850.18780.253.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1136996937.4322.18.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136997850.18780.253.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1136999537.4322.26.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 17:44 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 18:28 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:56 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be > > > running low on disk space: > > > > And BTW, the sizes below seem pretty much bogus. 151MB for libmng? > > No, these are yum's/rpm's sizes of accumulated "required diskspace" when > it tries to add another package. Yep, I kind of guessed it was that, sorry about the obfuscated irony. Something like "transaction would require XXXMB on the /foo/bar filesystem after adding quux" would be a better way to put it IMO. From dcbw at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 17:54:35 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:54:35 -0500 Subject: ppc buildhost: disk full? In-Reply-To: <1136997956.26502.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136997956.26502.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137002076.26905.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 11:45 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:56 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > My latest build submission died on a/the ppc buildhost. Appears to be > > running low on disk space: > > > > Job failed on arch ppc > > Build logs may be found at > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2804-digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5/ > > ------------------------------------------------- > > installing package libmng-devel-1.0.9-3.1 needs 142MB on the > > /mnt/build filesystem > > installing package openssl-devel-0.9.8a-5 needs 151MB on the > > /mnt/build filesystem > > installing package libmng-1.0.9-3.1 needs 151MB on the /mnt/build > > filesystem > > ... > > Fixing now... It might be a bit (say, an hour) before ppc1 is back up. Should be back up now. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 17:54:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:54:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177507] Review Request: pida In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111754.k0BHs1V0015511@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-11 12:53 EST ------- list of known issues: - gazpacho integration not working with since gazpacho 0.6.3 too new (will be fixed with pida 0.3.0 in a few weeks. - usually bicyclerepair would be required to load the python plugins but i left the dependencys out since the plugins (browser/profiler/debugger) dont load anyways. (will be fixed with 0.3.0) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imlinux at gmail.com Wed Jan 11 18:00:34 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:00:34 -0600 Subject: Buildsystem unstable? In-Reply-To: References: <1136994877.18780.242.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <43C547C2.1050105@gmail.com> Rex Dieter wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> I am observing weird build failures for FC4-build requests: > > ... > >> AFAIS, all failed build jobs had been processed on >> ppc1.fedora.redhat.com, while the successful one were processed on >> hammer1.fedora.redhat.com. >> Therefore, I'd guess ppc1 to be unstable. > > > The ppc buildhost appears to be running low on disk space. > > -- Rex > Disk space seems ok on PPC1 but its memory is pretty low: total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1870820 1862988 7832 0 537648 758008 -/+ buffers/cache: 567332 1303488 Swap: 2097144 9816 2087328 I'll look into it. -Mike From sopwith at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 18:58:03 2006 From: sopwith at redhat.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:58:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Account ? In-Reply-To: References: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Tim Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:25:02 +0530 > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > >Is it typical for the CLA instructions to take this long, or have I > > >screwed up something along the way ? > > You should get the instructions immediately. Try again? > > I didn't get the CLA stuff either. However, it worked OK when I went to > https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/send-cla.cgi and requested it > to be sent to me manually. > > Is this a documentation problem perhaps? You do have to click the 'send cla' link separately if you want to initiate the CLA process. If the docs say otherwise, they're incorrect. -- Elliot Red Hat Summit Nashville (May 30 - June 2, 2006) http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/ From jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu Wed Jan 11 18:59:18 2006 From: jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu (Jack Neely) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:59:18 -0500 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060111185918.GV2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> > The newer userland-package probably won't work with the old > kernel-version anyway. But the question is correct: how do we solve > this? IMHO the plugin should uninstall older kernel-modules. Or should a > package "kmod-foo-1.2-1.2.6.14-1.1776_FC4" simply have a > Obsolets: kmod-foo < 1.2 > Would yum in this case uninstall the older versions during update > (normally kmod-packages are installed and not updated, but in this case > we want it to update)? > In practice I have the kernel module require the userland package but not a specific version. Requires: openafs The justification is that there will not be multiple copies of the userland tools installed and that package will require the kmod of a specific version: Requires: kmod-openafs = 1.4.0 Jack -- Jack Neely Campus Linux Services Project Lead PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 19:21:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601111921.k0BJL2bN031162@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-11 14:20 EST ------- Thanks for the idea - I quite like it. The whole thing with full svn source RPM being in both core and extras was weird, but I didn't think of doing this. I'll rework and report back when done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From lists at timj.co.uk Wed Jan 11 19:42:36 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:42:36 +0000 Subject: Fedora Account ? In-Reply-To: References: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:58:03 -0500 (EST) Elliot Lee wrote: > You do have to click the 'send cla' link separately if you want to > initiate the CLA process. If the docs say otherwise, they're > incorrect. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors says: " Create an account in the Fedora Account System: * https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ * Click on 'Apply for a new account' and fill in the blanks. * You will be sent an email with instructions to sign the Contributor License Agreement (CLA) as part of this process. " Tim From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 19:43:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:43:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177556] New: Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded 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=177556 Summary: Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at timj.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/mod_extract_forwarded.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/mod_extract_forwarded-2.0.2-1.src.rpm Description: mod_extract_forwarded is a module for Apache 2 which hooks itself into Apache's header parsing phase and looks for the X-Forwarded-For header which some (most?) proxies add to the proxied HTTP requests. It extracts the IP from the X-Forwarded-For and modifies the connection data so to the rest of Apache the request looks like it came from that IP rather than the proxy IP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 20:49:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:49:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177556] Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112049.k0BKnCbM016829@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-11 15:48 EST ------- No objections nor a review, but I've used mod_rpaf from http://stderr.net/apache/rpaf/ in the past for similar purposes. Do you happen to be familiar with it? Based on quickly skimming the descriptions, mod_rpaf appears to deal with virtual hosts (X-Host/X-Forwarded-Host) in addition to X-Forwarded-For; mod_extract_forwarded's docs don't mention that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 20:53:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:53:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] New: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE 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=177567 Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: mgarski at post.pl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k-0.6.5-1.src.rpm Description: Smb4K is an SMB/CIFS share browser for KDE. It uses the Samba software suite to access the SMB/CIFS shares of the local network neighborhood. Its purpose is to provide a program that's easy to use and has as many features as 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 dcbw at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 21:48:55 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:48:55 -0500 Subject: Buildsystem unstable? In-Reply-To: <43C547C2.1050105@gmail.com> References: <1136994877.18780.242.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43C547C2.1050105@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137016136.30597.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 12:00 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: > > > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > >> I am observing weird build failures for FC4-build requests: > > > > ... > > > >> AFAIS, all failed build jobs had been processed on > >> ppc1.fedora.redhat.com, while the successful one were processed on > >> hammer1.fedora.redhat.com. > >> Therefore, I'd guess ppc1 to be unstable. > > > > > > The ppc buildhost appears to be running low on disk space. > > > > -- Rex > > > Disk space seems ok on PPC1 but its memory is pretty low: > > total used free shared buffers cached > Mem: 1870820 1862988 7832 0 537648 758008 > -/+ buffers/cache: 567332 1303488 > Swap: 2097144 9816 2087328 > > I'll look into it. Mike, I cleaned up the old buildroots and build results already on PPC1 around 12:15 EST, but it could probably stand a reboot? Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 21:49:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177580] New: Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration 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=177580 Summary: Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: dmalcolm at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/lat/lat.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/lat/lat-0.8.2-1.src.rpm Description: LDAP Administration Tool LAT is a GNOME-based GUI tool for working with LDAP, written in gtk-sharp/mono -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 21:55:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:55:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112155.k0BLt7ax030295@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-11 16:54 EST ------- Approved with the following final fixes applied: - Requires: file (see /usr/bin/xmlrev) - /usr/bin/xmlrev doesn't find xmlrev.xslt, ML_DIR in it needs to be changed to /usr/share/xml/xmldiff -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 22:04:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:04:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] New: Review Request: zaptel-kmod 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=177583 Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-1.2.6.15_1.1826.2.9_FC5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-1.2.6.15_1.1826.2.9_FC5.src.rpm Description: Zaptel (telephony hardware) kernel modules. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 22:08:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:08:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] New: Review Request: zaptel 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=177584 Summary: Review Request: zaptel Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: Tools for configuring/monitoring Zaptel telephony interfaces. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 22:12:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:12:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177556] Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112212.k0BMCpLY001528@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-01-11 17:12 EST ------- No, I've not come across mod_rpaf. They appear to do substantially the same thing. X-Host/X-Forwarded-Host isn't something I've come across, since I've only used Squid (which can be configured to pass on the "real" hostname to the backend server), so I can't comment on the support of either module for 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 Jan 11 22:14:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112214.k0BMEBv4001757@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-11 17:13 EST ------- Sent a email to the builder of nucleo Nicolas Roussel to me More options 6:44 am (10 hours ago) Hi, > I have a problem building nucleo into a RPM. I think I've fixed the problem. Could you try again with this one: http://insitu.lri.fr/~roussel/software/src/nucleo-2006-01-11.tar.bz2 Your log indicates that configure isn't able to find the OpenGL, JPEG, PNG and FreeType libraries. even if nucleo compiles, you won't be able to do much without all these will attempt to build nucleo 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 22:17:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:17:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112217.k0BMHKIc002276@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-11 17:17 EST ------- this belongs with Bug 177081 Sorry about the confusion -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 11 22:38:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:38:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112238.k0BMcOtI005677@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-11 17:38 EST ------- I uploaded the new version of the spec file to the same location. Lots of hacks, but it does work on my Rawhide box. There is also the source RPM there (ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/fedora-extras/subversion-api-docs-1.3.0-1.src.rpm) - only 17kB :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Wed Jan 11 22:12:48 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:12:48 +0100 Subject: How to make a package reviewed Message-ID: <1137017568.3060.10.camel@bureau.maison> Hi all, i'm not complaining but i would like to know how is it possible to have package reviewed : i have 2 packages still under review, i had some comments and i made the corrections but no formal review to accpet their or to say "you have to modify this before it could be accepted". I see also a lot of packages in bugzilla in the same case so how to try to solve this. Thanks Eric From wart at kobold.org Wed Jan 11 22:57:35 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:57:35 -0800 Subject: How to make a package reviewed In-Reply-To: <1137017568.3060.10.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1137017568.3060.10.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <43C58D5F.70604@kobold.org> Eric Tanguy wrote: > Hi all, i'm not complaining but i would like to know how is it possible > to have package reviewed : i have 2 packages still under review, i had > some comments and i made the corrections but no formal review to accpet > their or to say "you have to modify this before it could be accepted". > I see also a lot of packages in bugzilla in the same case so how to try > to solve this. > Thanks > Eric It often helps if you review other people's packages. Many people will return the favor by reviewing your packages in return. --Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 11 23:20:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:20:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] New: Review Request: mysql-administrator 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=177588 Summary: Review Request: mysql-administrator Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: dennis at ausil.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-administrator.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-administrator-1.1.5-1.src.rpm Description: MySQL Administrator enables developers and DBAs to easily perform all the command line operations visually including configuring servers, administering users, and dynamically monitoring database health. Other common administrative tasks such as monitoring replication status, backup and restore, and viewing logs can also be performed through the MySQL Administrator graphical console. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From orion at cora.nwra.com Wed Jan 11 23:25:54 2006 From: orion at cora.nwra.com (Orion Poplawski) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:25:54 -0700 Subject: Time for an FC5 orphaned packages list? Message-ID: <43C59402.70005@cora.nwra.com> Is it time for a FC5 section in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages? I'm looking at needing to do openmotif21 and/or openmotif22. -- 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 redhat.com Wed Jan 11 23:27:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:27:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601112327.k0BNR7B3012228@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 gajownik at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gajownik at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-11 18:26 EST ------- Hi! I did not have time to take a closer look at this package but I found two problems: - Missing builRequires: kdebase-devel. Without it compilation fails: smb4k_konqplugin.h:28:31: error: konqsidebarplugin.h: No such file or directory - ?BuildRequires: kdelibs-devel >= 3.2.0? -- it will not work as expected in Fedora because kdelibs has ?Epoch? tag set to ?6?. You can change it to: BuildRequires: kdelibs-devel >= 6:3.2 or remove ?>= 6:3.2? part completely. FE is only for FC3+ so it's always true. BTW You may want to add ?--disable-dependency-tracking --enable-final? to the configure script (I see that Rex Dieter adds these flags to his KDE packages). If no one will be willing to make a review, I can do that at the weekend. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 02:35:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:35:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175047] Review Request: NetworkManager-openvpn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120235.k0C2ZCEv005324@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-11 21:35 EST ------- NetworkManager-openvpn no longer builds against the NetworkManager that is in development: nm-openvpn-service.c:48:46: error: NetworkManager/NetworkManagerVPN.h: No such file or 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 nman64 at n-man.com Thu Jan 12 03:00:13 2006 From: nman64 at n-man.com (Patrick Barnes) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:00:13 -0600 Subject: Fedora Account ? In-Reply-To: References: <20060111154325.GB19058@hedwig.net.cmu.edu> <43C52A56.202@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43C5C63D.7050102@n-man.com> Tim Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:58:03 -0500 (EST) > Elliot Lee wrote: > > > You do have to click the 'send cla' link separately if you want to > > initiate the CLA process. If the docs say otherwise, they're > > incorrect. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors says: > > " > Create an account in the Fedora Account System: > > * https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ > * Click on 'Apply for a new account' and fill in the blanks. > * You will be sent an email with instructions to sign the > Contributor License Agreement (CLA) as part of this process. > " > > Tim > > I've fixed this. Thanks for the pointer. I've also reformatted that guide for a much sharper and easier-to-read appearance. -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64 at n-man.com http://www.n-man.com/ -- Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 03:25:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:25:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120325.k0C3PgvM012017@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: mysql- |Review Request: mysql- |administrator |administrator CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-11 22:25 EST ------- I've compiled & verified the functionality on devel, and taken an initial look at the spec file. I did notice it got confused and hung a few times while forinstance trying to get the user list.. Also the help menu->contents doesn't do anything, but these might be upstream issues. I've noticed the %dir %{_datadir}/mysql-gui/administrator/ with the trailing /, i didn't think it needed to be there? Also rpmbuild gave me the following error: warning: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mysql-gui-common.mo /usr/share/locale/ja/LC_MESSAGES/mysql-gui-common.mo /usr/share/locale/pt_BR/LC_MESSAGES/mysql-gui-common.mo which indicates you forgot to include the find_lang macro to pick up the language files: %install ..... %find_lang mysql-gui-common and in the mysql-gui-common files part: %files -n mysql-gui-common -f mysql-gui-common.lang rpmlint didn't report any errors for the build packages I'll try to do a mock build and an official review checklist once the packaging errors mentioned above are corrected. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 05:00:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:00:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120500.k0C50KnZ027908@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-12 00:00 EST ------- New package that fixes the build problems on the devel branch. http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl-3.3-0.2.RC1.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl.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 Thu Jan 12 05:01:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:01:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177359] Review Request: itk - object oriented extensions for Tk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120501.k0C513Up028055@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itk - object oriented extensions for Tk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177359 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-12 00:00 EST ------- New package that fixes the build problems on the devel branch. http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itk-3.3-0.2.RC1.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itk.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 Thu Jan 12 05:01:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:01:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] New: Review Request: libpri 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=177603 Summary: Review Request: libpri Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: libpri is a C implementation of the Primary Rate ISDN specification. It was based on the Bellcore specification SR-NWT-002343 for National ISDN. As of May 12, 2001, it has been tested work with NI-2, Nortel DMS-100, and Lucent 5E Custom protocols on switches from Nortel and Lucent. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 05:22:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:22:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175425] Review Request: tile - Modern versions of Tk widget set In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120522.k0C5Ml5w030673@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tile - Modern versions of Tk widget set https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175425 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-12 00:22 EST ------- New package that fixes the build problems on the devel branch. http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/tile-0.7.2-2.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/tile.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 Thu Jan 12 07:08:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:08:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120708.k0C780vG010359@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-12 02:07 EST ------- "Requires: file" still missing in 0.6.7-5 in CVS (see comment 7). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 12 07:16:20 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:16:20 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <20060111185918.GV2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060111185918.GV2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <1137050180.15369.11.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Mittwoch, den 11.01.2006, 13:59 -0500 schrieb Jack Neely: > > The newer userland-package probably won't work with the old > > kernel-version anyway. But the question is correct: how do we solve > > this? IMHO the plugin should uninstall older kernel-modules. Or should a > > package "kmod-foo-1.2-1.2.6.14-1.1776_FC4" simply have a > > Obsolets: kmod-foo < 1.2 > > Would yum in this case uninstall the older versions during update > > (normally kmod-packages are installed and not updated, but in this case > > we want it to update)? > In practice I have the kernel module require the userland package but > not a specific version. > > Requires: openafs > > The justification is that there will not be multiple copies of the > userland tools installed and that package will require the kmod of a > specific version: > > Requires: kmod-openafs = 1.4.0 Okay. Welcome to our Theater. Main actor: User foo. Scene 1: User foo steps up. He has only limited bandwidth and therefor only once a month runs a full "yum update". He uses openafs. One week after he ran "yum update" he runs # yum update kernel kmod-openafs to get the shiny new kernel 2.6.15 that was released and the kernel-module he needs (Fixme: the yum-plugin should take care of the later). But openafs was also updated in between, but due to the Requires: openafs in it he doesn't get the new openafs userland package. User foo restarts to the new kernel and openafs won't work, because the older openafs userland package doesn't work with the new version of the kmod. User foo looks frustrated and begins to debug [...] End of scene 1. Don't know if the part "openafs won't work, because the older openafs userland package doesn't work with the new version of the kmod" is true for openafs, but it is for a lot of kernel-modules I know. So no, this doesn't work afaics. CU thl From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 12 09:08:40 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:08:40 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137050180.15369.11.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136644261.6316.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1136646055.2716.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136669463.2509.25.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060110203806.GO2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1136926902.2687.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060111185918.GV2248@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1137050180.15369.11.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1137056921.18780.280.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 08:16 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 11.01.2006, 13:59 -0500 schrieb Jack Neely: > > > The newer userland-package probably won't work with the old > > > kernel-version anyway. But the question is correct: how do we solve > > > this? IMHO the plugin should uninstall older kernel-modules. Or should a > > > package "kmod-foo-1.2-1.2.6.14-1.1776_FC4" simply have a > > > Obsolets: kmod-foo < 1.2 > > > Would yum in this case uninstall the older versions during update > > > (normally kmod-packages are installed and not updated, but in this case > > > we want it to update)? > > > In practice I have the kernel module require the userland package but > > not a specific version. > > > > Requires: openafs > > > > The justification is that there will not be multiple copies of the > > userland tools installed and that package will require the kmod of a > > specific version: > > > > Requires: kmod-openafs = 1.4.0 > > Okay. Welcome to our Theater. Main actor: User foo. .. > User foo looks frustrated and begins to debug [...] Now, the main character might want improvise on "inaccessible filesystems", "non-bootable systems" or "garbled X" ;) > End of scene 1. > > Don't know if the part "openafs won't work, because the older openafs > userland package doesn't work with the new version of the kmod" is true > for openafs, but it is for a lot of kernel-modules I know. So no, this > doesn't work afaics. I realize, the scripts' author has understood the scenario - Congrats! Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 09:37:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:37:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601120937.k0C9bHGY030064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-12 04:37 EST ------- Pratically, you need to include devel package of libjpeg, libpng and freeglut on BuildRequires inside the spec file. Once you fixed them, post both spec and srpms. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 10:06:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177065] Ownership of texmf/doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121006.k0CA6UeQ002034@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Ownership of texmf/doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177065 ------- Additional Comments From jnovy at redhat.com 2006-01-12 05:06 EST ------- An update is comming soon to have it fixed in FC4 as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 10:58:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:58:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121058.k0CAwJ7G010667@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-12 05:58 EST ------- >From the install notes The trick with configure is that you might need to set appropriate values for CPPFLAGS, CXXFLAGS, LDFLAGS, LIBS or CXX. Try things like env CXX=CC ~/src/nucleo/configure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 11:28:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:28:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121128.k0CBSgKt016370@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-12 06:28 EST ------- It is very difficult to see something that we don't want to see. ;-) In the case of FC-3 there are two options, either require gcc4-gfortran or the solution that I prefer use g77 and require (for building) gcc-g77, removing at the same time the line that says that the fortran compiler is gfortran. This is not rocket science. :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 11:34:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:34:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121134.k0CBYLJY017578@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 will at netmindz.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |will at netmindz.net ------- Additional Comments From will at netmindz.net 2006-01-12 06:34 EST ------- This spec is totally missing the kernel modules and also does not split the devel I would recommend you bases it on http://dag.wieers.com/packages/zaptel/zaptel.spec but make it compliant with any fedora conventions. Also as you will see from DAG's packaging, that the Makefile will work if you supply the correct parameters to 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 Thu Jan 12 11:38:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 06:38:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177504] Review Request: altermime In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121138.k0CBcr7W018219@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: altermime https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177504 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ivazquez at ivazquez.net OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-12 06:38 EST ------- - The spacing and order in %files is a bit odd The rest looks good. 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 Thu Jan 12 12:06:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:06:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121206.k0CC6vxR022579@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-01-12 07:06 EST ------- bug #177583 has the kernel modules -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 12:10:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:10:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173054] Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121210.k0CCALhc022945@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173054 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-12 07:10 EST ------- * spec file looks good * patch visited * upstream locations verified * binary package contents look good * test WAV file packed/unpacked (i386) APPROVED * Caution: 4.3 => 4.31 : 4.4 would be seen as older than 4.31, since 4 < 31 => you would need to choose version=4.40 if next release were 4.4 * Debian package contains contributed manual pages and mentions problems on some archs where "char" is unsigned by default (may need investigation, since compiler gives several related warnings), http://packages.debian.org/unstable/sound/wavpack Consider giving it some testing in FE development first prior to publishing it for FC4 and older. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 12:19:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:19:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121219.k0CCJTbN024084@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-12 07:19 EST ------- http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k.spec http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k-0.6.5-2.src.rpm I have added kdebase-devel to BR. I'll think about ?--disable-dependency-tracking --enable-final?, thanks for info. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 13:03:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:03:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177619] New: Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing 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=177619 Summary: Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ivazquez at ivazquez.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/python-nltk-lite.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/python-nltk-lite-0.6.1-1.src.rpm Description: NLTK, the Natural Language Toolkit, is a suite of Python libraries and programs for symbolic and statistical natural language processing. This package contains a cut-down version of the data which contains only redistributable corpora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 13:31:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:31:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121331.k0CDVrcE001471@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 08:31 EST ------- 1) As Tim Jackson says, the kernel modules are in bug # 177583. See http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/KernelModuleProposal and the fedora-extras list archives for a discussion of the new kernel module packaging proposal. 2) Yes, my spec does split off a -devel package. 3) The problem with just specifying CFLAGS before running make is that the Makefile will append additional optimization parameters that I don't want. 4) The problem with using "make install" is that it would force a build of the device drivers (which are built in a separate package), as well as running a large number of other commands that are inappropriate to be run as part of the packaging process. I've used Dag's and other people's .spec files as inspiration - I've been packaging up Zaptel for a while now... Now that Fedora Extras has a process for packaging kernel modules it was time for me to share my packages with the rest of the world. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Thu Jan 12 13:52:53 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:22:53 +0330 Subject: Mono package policy In-Reply-To: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > until FC-5 goes GOLD. FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow new FC3 packages in extras after that?! > (also, an rpm errata for FC-3/FC-4 would > be needed). https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177432 roozbeh From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Thu Jan 12 13:56:10 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:26:10 +0330 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601101159p17c81dedue7416741cee1b3b8@mail.gmail.com> References: <1136913217.3189.91.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <200601101924.k0AJOSIO021986@mx1.redhat.com> <604aa7910601101159p17c81dedue7416741cee1b3b8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137074170.2999.47.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 14:59 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Assuming its technically possible to implement in bugzilla. It depends > on if bugzilla knows with accuracy that someone already has > sponsorship status or not. Which may or may not be true. Well, if one has sponsorship status, almost always he is the default bug assignee for an Extras package. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 14:05:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121405.k0CE5RvX006865@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-12 09:05 EST ------- Agreeing with comment 2. As a side-note, prefer the %configure macro over running ./configure manually. The macro sets --prefix= --mandir= and many other flags automatically and also exports the global compiler optimisation flags. Browse standard output of your build attempt to see what is done in the %build section. At the beginning of %install section, run "rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}" in order to start in an empty package build root 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 14:18:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:18:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121418.k0CEIYbu008772@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 09:18 EST ------- One more note, when installing a .desktop file you should run update-desktop-database: Requires(post): desktop-file-utils Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils ... %post update-desktop-database &> /dev/null ||: %postun update-desktop-database &> /dev/null ||: See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-d37d740d062d3aa6013aab44a79de88a6c1fe533 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 14:36:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:36:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121436.k0CEa7gp011585@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 somlo at cmu.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |somlo at cmu.edu ------- Additional Comments From somlo at cmu.edu 2006-01-12 09:35 EST ------- > Source0: http://ftp.digium.com/pub/libpri/libpri-%{version}.tar.gz Source0: http://ftp.digium.com/pub/libpri/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-buildroot BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT use %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > %changelog > * Mon Apr 11 2005 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.0.7-0.3 You're up to version 1.2.1-1, so are you missing some changelog 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 Thu Jan 12 14:38:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:38:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174320] Review Request: gcdmaster - Gnome Audio CD mastering In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121438.k0CEcTfp012039@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gcdmaster - Gnome Audio CD mastering https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174320 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-12 09:38 EST ------- > --define '_with_mp3 1'" will enable the mp3 support auto-detection. Better: pass "--with mp3" as an argument to rpmbuild. It will set the _with_mp3 macro to 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 ivazquez at ivazquez.net Thu Jan 12 14:44:49 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: Mono package policy In-Reply-To: <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:22 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > > until FC-5 goes GOLD. > > FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow > new FC3 packages in extras after that?! It's at the maintainer's discretion. Note that FE currently has some packages with branches going all the way back to RHL9. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 14:42:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:42:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121442.k0CEg3Zm012610@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-12 09:41 EST ------- Depends on what is included in the .desktop file. If MIME type assignments are done, update-desktop-database must be run. Else, not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 14:45:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:45:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121445.k0CEjka5013438@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-12 09:45 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > use %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Both are acceptable. The only requirement is to be consistent throughout the spec file, which is the case here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 14:48:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121448.k0CEmENY013834@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 09:48 EST ------- there is no MIME type in the .desktop so there is no need to run update-desktop-database fixed the lang files, thanks i missed them in the output and ive removed the trailing / i changed the .desktop file options to make it show up in "System Tools" menu i feel this is the best place for it. updated SRPM http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-administrator-1.1.5-2.src.rpm updated SPEC http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-administrator.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 Thu Jan 12 14:52:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121452.k0CEq9Mf014503@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 09:52 EST ------- should work fine on any 32 bit architecture. For the moment, I'll change it to exclude ia64 and x86_64. That will change when mono is packaged sanely -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:00:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:00:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121500.k0CF0Dl5015821@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 10:00 EST ------- Woops my bad about the update-desktop, was confused by the menu item not showing up. Giving the new package a swirl 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 Thu Jan 12 15:15:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:15:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121515.k0CFFtNb018139@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-12 10:15 EST ------- Update Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-2.src.rpm I also fixed a number of issues that I noticed after getting a good night's sleep. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:20:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:20:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121520.k0CFKXQ7018707@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 10:20 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-2.src.rpm Due to my x86 machine having mono installed from source and my other boxes being x86_64, only use the spec file held *outside* of the srpm. The test compile has the dependancies commented out for the spec file (inside the srpm) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:33:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:33:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121533.k0CFXTiF020908@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 city-fan.org 2006-01-12 10:33 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > Spec Name or Url: > http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec > SRPM Name or Url: > http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-2.src.rpm > > Due to my x86 machine having mono installed from source and my other boxes being > x86_64, only use the spec file held *outside* of the srpm. The test compile has > the dependancies commented out for the spec file (inside the srpm) You should be able to build i386 packages on an x86_64 box using mock - see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy/Mock -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:45:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:45:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121545.k0CFjCIn023096@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 10:45 EST ------- That's not really the problem. Mono itself is incorrectly packaged. Instead of using %{_libdir}, it's using an explicit rule for /usr/lib. The package itself will build happily (I've just tested it on an x86 box in for repair!) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:50:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:50:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121550.k0CFoBtF024349@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 10:50 EST ------- The formal review steps: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - Spec file handles locales properly (thru find_lang macro) - No so files so no ldconfig needed - Installs propper desktop file, under fedora category, shows up in menu and with proper icon - All files have proper permissions (double checked with ls -al `rpm -ql mysql-administrator`) - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No header files or static libs, so no need for -devel package - Nor pkgconfig files, .so files or .la files - Package contains GUI application, and includes proper desktop file - Package owns directories properly Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - Build in mock (fc5 devel) - Could not try build on all architectures, plague will hopefully tell us :-) - Functionality seems to work (though some problems with user admin with fedora 5's mysql 5.0.18, but that problem exists upsteam too) - No insane scriplets, or scriplets at all - Sane require chain (mysql-administrator requires mysql-gui-common package FE-ACCEPTED in my book (presuming this is not your first package and needing sponsorship) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:58:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:58:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121558.k0CFwBoM026159@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 stickster at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-12 10:58 EST ------- Sorry Ville, I somehow managed to miss that line in your comment entirely. I hadn't tagged or built anything yet, so I simply added that fix to the existing release 0.6.7-5. Thanks for your patient help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 15:58:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:58:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121558.k0CFwJJI026211@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-12 10:58 EST ------- FWIW, a couple of notes from an unsuccessful build on CentOS 4.2 (due to too old gtkmm24 version), most likely applies to FC3 too: - BuildRequires: gtkmm24-devel >= 2.6 (add version, 2.4.x won't work) - BuildRequires: gettext (probably, for translations) - In beginning of %build: export CPPFLAGS="$(pcre-config --cflags)" (required for old pcre) - I *guess* that the explicit mysql and gtkmm24 dependencies might not be needed Some or all of the above, eg. at least the minimum required gtkmm24-devel version would be nice to have even if you're targetting 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 Thu Jan 12 16:00:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:00:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121600.k0CG0Cku026652@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 177512 depends on bug 177508, which changed state. Bug 177508 Summary: Libraries not being correctly placed in rpms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177508 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NOTABUG 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 Thu Jan 12 16:05:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:05:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] New: Review Request: libtorrent 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=177635 Summary: Review Request: libtorrent Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: chabotc at xs4all.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SPEC: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/libtorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/libtorrent-0.8.2-1.src.rpm Description: LibTorrent is a BitTorrent library written in C++ for *nix, with a focus on high performance and good code. The library differentiates itself from other implementations by transfering directly from file pages to the network stack. On high-bandwidth connections it is able to seed at 3 times the speed of the official client. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 16:07:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:07:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] New: Review Request: rtorrent 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=177636 Summary: Review Request: rtorrent Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: chabotc at xs4all.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SPEC: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/rtorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/rtorrent-0.4.2-1.src.rpm Description: A client frontend to libtorrent, which on high-bandwidth connections it is able to seed at 3 times the speed of the official client, using ncurses and is ideal for use with screen or dtach. It supports saving of sessions and allows the user to add and remove torrents and scanning of directories for torrent files to seed and/or download. Depends on package libtorrent which can be found in bug #177635 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 16:40:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:40:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121640.k0CGeBOQ001348@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 11:40 EST ------- Thank you for your review. i made a change to only include the gcc4.1 patch on fedora >4 as i got a gcc error on fc4 with the patch applied. everything built ok without the patch on fc4. i am also going to implement the version in requires. as it will help people who rebuild extras packages. Importing -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dcbw at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 16:56:30 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:56:30 -0500 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems Message-ID: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> Hi, So DavidZ and I were talking about this, and the matrix of different modules for just one SRPM here gets huge. We have the following issues: 1) UP, SMP, hugemen, XEN 2) i586, i686, x86_64, em64t, ppc32, ppc64, ia64 3) How many past kernels to rebuild for Even with just these 3, we get at _least_ 30 different kernel module RPMs (3 "flavors", minimum of 5 arches, 2 past kernels). That's a huge number. Questions: Is this really what we want? How do we deal with the explosion of permutations of kernel modules? Resources in the buildsystem aren't infinite, how many jobs/rpmbuilds should we actually kick off? We can't possibly rebuild modules for every previously released kernel. We've can only really do, IMHO, <= 4 builds of each module for a different kernel. How many should we actually do? This is all independent of the actual specfile mechanisms and mechanics of rebuilding the modules. This is simply a question of how many factors do we care about here. It's not out of the question to start small and grow the permutations out as we go along and add more architectures, flavors, etc. Dan From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 12 17:09:04 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:09:04 -0500 Subject: Some BZ cleanups In-Reply-To: <1137074170.2999.47.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1136913217.3189.91.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <200601101924.k0AJOSIO021986@mx1.redhat.com> <604aa7910601101159p17c81dedue7416741cee1b3b8@mail.gmail.com> <1137074170.2999.47.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <604aa7910601120909r3f32a1c2m7bb9b765d101d89f@mail.gmail.com> On 1/12/06, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 14:59 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > Assuming its technically possible to implement in bugzilla. It depends > > on if bugzilla knows with accuracy that someone already has > > sponsorship status or not. Which may or may not be true. > > Well, if one has sponsorship status, almost always he is the default bug > assignee for an Extras package. I think you misunderstand. The mechanism to assign the default assign for "bug tickets" after a component has been imported into cvs is somewhat automated based on the owners file in cvs. Its sort of a one time assignment for that component when the component is created initially. The question is does bugzilla really know for sure that someone has been sponsered in the fedora accounts system? The bugzilla groups and the fedora account system are not a 1-to-1 mapping. Anyone who is a member of fedorabugs in the fedora account system can get extensive rights to mainpulate bugzilla entries, but they do not have cvs commit access or sponsorship in the package contributor sense. I simply do not know if bugzilla has a mechanism to distinquish people with sponsorship from people with bugzilla editting rights, which aren't necessarily the same group of people. Now it could be that bugzilla's "fedora_contrib" account flag is exactly what is needed. Is this bugzilla account flag only given to sponsored contributors to extras? I simply don't know for sure if thats the case. -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 17:25:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:25:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121725.k0CHPBhV009445@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176780 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 12:25 EST ------- First observations: Package does build cleanly on FC5 devel However filepermissions for the %doc files are 755, they should be 644. This makes rpmlint complain: rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/wp_tray-0.4.6-1.i386.rpm E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/COPYING E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/ChangeLog E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/TODO E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/README E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/AUTHORS E: wp_tray script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/wp_tray-0.4.6/NEWS The icons for displaying in the gnome menu seem to be missing, though the desktop file has: Icon=/usr/share/pixmaps/wp_tray/ There's no such directory / files in the build package. The configuration dialog seems to be nothing but a glade template with no functional code, none of the buttons do anything, only way to close it is by clicking the [X] window icon The 'wallpaper search too' seems to be just as function-less as the config dialog. The URL to the home page gives a 404, should probably read: http://planetearthworm.com/projects/wp_tray/index.php The Source0: tag should really use atleast %{version}, so it auto updates with version updates. Also the download link is (now) invalid, the line should read something like: Source0: http://planetearthworm.com/projects/wp_tray/files/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz Much newer upstream version is available (0.5.1), might be worth updating? It seems to address the non-working dialogs among other things. New upstream version does have a lot of new/different requirements. I think to satisfy its new requirements you'd probably need: BuildRequires: libglademm24-devel libgnomecanvasmm26-devel gconfmm26-devel libgnomemm26-devel libgnomeuimm26-devel Requires: libglademm24 libgnomecanvasmm26 gconfmm26 libgnomemm26 libgnomeuimm26 Which are present in atleast fedora-extras-development (haven't checked for FC4, but should be) What else you'd need is the boostfilesystem libraries, which unfortunatly are not packaged for Fedora Extra's yet (though feel free to :-)) which i think are located at: http://www.boost.org/ If you make your way thru all of that i'd be happy to give a formal 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 Jan 12 17:28:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:28:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121728.k0CHSnr1010301@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 12:28 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-3.src.rpm Now works with all platforms, though I'm less than happy using %{buildroot}/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 chabotc at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 12 17:41:48 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:41:48 +0100 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries Message-ID: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Some package i was trying to give a review has a much newer upstream version available, however it requires the "boost filesystem" libraries to function (c++ libs) The licence used for these libraries is the "Boost Software Licence", described here: http://www.boost.org/more/license_info.html The full licence is here: http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt Relevant information seems to be: How is the Boost license different from the GNU General Public License (GPL)? The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license your own code under any terms you like. The GPL is also much longer, and thus may be harder to understand. Is it safe and ok to package this for Fedora? Seems to be a much more free licence, and allows distribution of the source/compiled package, so should be ok right? -- Chris Chabot -------------- 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 Jan 12 17:44:30 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:44:30 +0100 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Donnerstag, den 12.01.2006, 11:56 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > So DavidZ and I were talking about this, and the matrix of different > modules for just one SRPM here gets huge. We have the following issues: > > 1) UP, SMP, hugemen, XEN We have no hugemem currently, but xen-guest and xen-hypervisor. > 2) i586, i686, x86_64, em64t, ppc32, ppc64, ia64 No extras for ia64 (yet) and em64t has no special kernel/is mostly x86_64 anyway. But you forgot ppc64iseries. > 3) How many past kernels to rebuild for See below: > Even with just these 3, we get at _least_ 30 different kernel module > RPMs (3 "flavors", minimum of 5 arches, 2 past kernels). That's a huge > number. I count 12 kernels (without past ones) that are of interest for Fedora Extras: 1 | i586 -- UP 4 | i686 -- UP, SMP, xen-xen-guest, xen-hypervisor 3 | x86_64 -- SMP, xen-xen-guest, xen-hypervisor (soon, hopefully) 2 | ppc -- UP, SMP (no xen yet afaik) 1 | ppc64 -- SMP 1 | ppc64iseries -- SMP === 12 resulting RPMs build on 6 targets with one SRPM per target ^^^ > Questions: > > Is this really what we want? I don't think we get below those 12. Maybe 11 if we ignore ppc64iseries ;-) > How do we deal with the explosion of permutations of kernel modules? Good question. > Resources in the buildsystem aren't infinite, how many jobs/rpmbuilds > should we actually kick off? If it's only those six and no past kernel it shouldn't block the buildsystems for too long AFAICS and IMHO. > We can't possibly rebuild modules for every previously released kernel.[...] Agreed. My vote: Only build for the newest one. ; Answer: Ralf, let's build only for the newest one in the beginning. If that doesn't work we can still come back to this point and discuss it anew. > This is all independent of the actual specfile mechanisms and mechanics > of rebuilding the modules. As long as we don't go back to the old scheme where one SRPM did build one RPM. > This is simply a question of how many > factors do we care about here. [...] Did I miss anything? CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at camperquake.de Thu Jan 12 17:52:35 2006 From: fedora at camperquake.de (Ralf Ertzinger) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:52:35 +0100 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries In-Reply-To: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060112175235.GC23571@ryoko.camperquake.de> On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Is it safe and ok to package this for Fedora? Seems to be a much more > free licence, and allows distribution of the source/compiled package, so > should be ok right? boost itself is in either core or extras, I do not know which. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Thu Jan 12 17:57:14 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:57:14 -0600 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries In-Reply-To: <20060112175235.GC23571@ryoko.camperquake.de> References: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060112175235.GC23571@ryoko.camperquake.de> Message-ID: Ralf Ertzinger wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > >>Is it safe and ok to package this for Fedora? Seems to be a much more >>free licence, and allows distribution of the source/compiled package, so >>should be ok right? > > > boost itself is in either core or extras, I do not know which. boost is in Core. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 18:03:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:03:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121803.k0CI3LoT017846@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 city-fan.org 2006-01-12 13:03 EST ------- Don't use "%{__rm} -rf *" in %prep; it'll clobber any other package builds going on in the same build area. Instead of: %prep %{__mkdir} -p %{name}-%{version} %{__rm} -rf * %{__unzip} -q %{SOURCE0} -d %{name}-%{version} %{__cp} %{SOURCE1} %{name}-%{version} I'd suggest: %prep %setup -c -q %{__cp} %{SOURCE1} . By doing this you can also remove the "cd %{name}-%{version}" from the start of %build. I'd also suggest replacing the hardcoded "1.0.7" in the Source0 URL with "%{version}" to ease future package updates, and please word-wrap %description so that it's no longer than 80 characters per line. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 12 18:16:13 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:16:13 +0100 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries In-Reply-To: References: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060112175235.GC23571@ryoko.camperquake.de> Message-ID: <1137089773.20196.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Ah and so it is, the broken yum headers/checksums fooled me into thinking it wasn't Thanks :-) On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 11:57 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Ralf Ertzinger wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > > > > >>Is it safe and ok to package this for Fedora? Seems to be a much more > >>free licence, and allows distribution of the source/compiled package, so > >>should be ok right? > > > > > > boost itself is in either core or extras, I do not know which. > > boost is in Core. > > -- Rex > > -------------- 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 Jan 12 18:24:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:24:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] New: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia 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=177658 Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: roozbeh at farsiweb.info QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki-1.5.5-1.src.rpm Description: MediaWiki is the software used for Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org) and the other Wikimedia Foundation websites. Compared to other wikis, it has an wide range of features and support for high-traffic websites using multiple servers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 18:32:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:32:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175566] Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121832.k0CIWLQH022977@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kbibtex - BibTeX Editor for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175566 ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de 2006-01-12 13:32 EST ------- This package has been built cleanly within FC-4 and devel branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 18:43:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:43:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121843.k0CIh4QV025656@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-12 13:42 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-3.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-3.src.rpm Fixes building on 64 bit systems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 19:02:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 14:02:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177662] 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=177662 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ntgem2004 at yahoo.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: SRPM Name or Url: Description: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 19:07:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 14:07:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177662] Review Request:
In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601121907.k0CJ7r4J029906@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=177662 dennis at ausil.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request:
|package name here> Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 14:07 EST ------- please fill the information in correctly when submitting a request -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 12 17:48:25 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:48:25 -0500 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries In-Reply-To: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910601120948h6b3d76dck60c57dcdcf901acf@mail.gmail.com> On 1/12/06, Chris Chabot wrote: > Some package i was trying to give a review has a much newer upstream > version available, however it requires the "boost filesystem" libraries > to function (c++ libs) Uhm.. you realise that boot is already a part of Fedora Core right? on my fc4 system yum list "*boost*" Available Packages boost.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing boost-debuginfo.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing boost-devel.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing boost-doc.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing -jef"I don't understand the point of this question."spaleta From chabotc at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 12 20:12:44 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:12:44 +0100 Subject: Question about licence for "boost" libraries In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601120948h6b3d76dck60c57dcdcf901acf@mail.gmail.com> References: <1137087708.15597.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601120948h6b3d76dck60c57dcdcf901acf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137096764.20196.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> Yep two other people on the list pointed this out to me earlier today, but thanks :-) On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 12:48 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/12/06, Chris Chabot wrote: > > Some package i was trying to give a review has a much newer upstream > > version available, however it requires the "boost filesystem" libraries > > to function (c++ libs) > > Uhm.. you realise that boot is already a part of Fedora Core right? > > on my fc4 system yum list "*boost*" > Available Packages > boost.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing > boost-debuginfo.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing > boost-devel.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing > boost-doc.i386 1.33.0-3.fc4 updates-testing > > -jef"I don't understand the point of this question."spaleta > -------------- 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 Jan 12 21:01:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:01:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122101.k0CL1W47021324@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 16:01 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-2.2.6.15_1.1826.2.10_FC5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-2.2.6.15_1.1826.2.10_FC5.src.rpm Won't build SMP variant on x86_64 since x86_64 doesn't have a SMP variant. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:09:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122109.k0CL9oLo022729@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 wart at kobold.org 2006-01-12 16:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Updated Spec/SRPM: > > Spec Name or Url: > http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-2.2.6.15_1.1826.2.10_FC5.spec > SRPM Name or Url: > http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1-2.2.6.15_1.1826.2.10_FC5.src.rpm > > Won't build SMP variant on x86_64 since x86_64 doesn't have a SMP variant. Are you sure? x86_64 smp kernels are definitely available: # rpm -q kernel-smp kernel-smp-2.6.14-1.1656_FC4.x86_64 and I verified that it does build the x86_64 smp variant with no errors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 cypherpunks.ca Thu Jan 12 21:23:45 2006 From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:23:45 +0100 (CET) Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Dan Williams wrote: > 1) UP, SMP, hugemen, XEN > 2) i586, i686, x86_64, em64t, ppc32, ppc64, ia64 > 3) How many past kernels to rebuild for > > Even with just these 3, we get at _least_ 30 different kernel module > RPMs (3 "flavors", minimum of 5 arches, 2 past kernels). That's a huge > number. > > Questions: > > Is this really what we want? I think so :( > This is all independent of the actual specfile mechanisms and mechanics > of rebuilding the modules. This is simply a question of how many > factors do we care about here. It's not out of the question to start > small and grow the permutations out as we go along and add more > architectures, flavors, etc. The way FreeS/WAN did this in the past was to build one rpm with all flavour kernel modules, and upon installation detect which module you need and link as the actual .ko file. At least that limits the amounts of packages, but it was only i86 modules we cared about back then. Now there is a lot more. One way out of this, is to only provide src.rpm's for the kernel module packages and have people build them on their system. But that requires installing kernel development tools. Paul From paul at cypherpunks.ca Thu Jan 12 21:28:18 2006 From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:28:18 +0100 (CET) Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > 1) UP, SMP, hugemen, XEN > > We have no hugemem currently, but xen-guest and xen-hypervisor. A lot of kernel modules, eg drivers, do not apply to xenu's though. > > Resources in the buildsystem aren't infinite, how many jobs/rpmbuilds > > should we actually kick off? > > If it's only those six and no past kernel it shouldn't block the > buildsystems for too long AFAICS and IMHO. Would it help to pipeline the kernel module packages after a kernel build? I'm not familiar with the mock build system. Paul -- "Happiness is never grand" --- Mustapha Mond, World Controller (Brave New World) From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 12 21:24:17 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:24:17 -0500 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910601121324h6b77d09du61710e165d0c732f@mail.gmail.com> On 1/12/06, Paul Wouters wrote: > The way FreeS/WAN did this in the past was to build one rpm with all > flavour kernel modules, and upon installation detect which module > you need and link as the actual .ko file. ewww, this seems very broken to me. What happens if i install a kernel-module like this first with just the smp kernel then i install the xen kernel or the uniprocessor kernel, how do the correct symlinks get created? -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 12 21:31:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:31:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122131.k0CLVjnf026324@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 16:31 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > > > Won't build SMP variant on x86_64 since x86_64 doesn't have a SMP variant. > > Are you sure? FC5 does not have a separate kernel for UP & SMP x86_64 systems. The same kernel runs on both. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:35:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:35:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122135.k0CLZEIq027172@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-12 16:35 EST ------- > mysql-gui-common : This package contains several common libraries and > data shared among the MySQL GUI Suites in all platforms. This is odd. The package doesn't contain any libraries at all. How is "all platforms" supposed to be understood? The common gui libraries are compiled and linked statically, so they cannot be shared with any other packages currently. Are the images and Glade files shared? If so, how? > Requires: gtkmm24 Redundant, since an automatic dependency on the soname is added by the rpmbuild backend. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:38:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173054] Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122138.k0CLc7tr027525@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173054 ------- Additional Comments From lemenkov at newmail.ru 2006-01-12 16:37 EST ------- > * Caution: 4.3 => 4.31 : 4.4 would be seen as older than 4.31, since 4 < 31 => > you would need to choose version=4.40 if next release were 4.4 Maybe it would be beter to choose version == 4.3.1 for this package? > Consider giving it some testing in FE development first prior to > publishing it for FC4 and older. Ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:38:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:38:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122138.k0CLcL3w027554@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 16:38 EST ------- Missing build requires: gtkhtml2-devel (config fails without it) (trying srpm from comment #12) rpmlint isn't so happy either: E: gnome-yum no-changelogname-tag E: gnome-yum zero-length /usr/share/doc/gnome-yum-0.1.2/README W: gnome-yum no-dependency-on usermode-consoleonly E: gnome-yum non-executable-script /usr/share/gnome-yum/gyum-query.sh 0644 E: gnome-yum zero-length /usr/share/doc/gnome-yum-0.1.2/NEWS W: gnome-yum non-conffile-in-etc /etc/pam.d/gnome-yum E: gnome-yum zero-length /usr/share/doc/gnome-yum-0.1.2/TODO W: gnome-yum non-conffile-in-etc /etc/security/console.apps/gnome-yum Changelog is just completely missing .. shouldn't be :-) Empty file warnings are easy to fix, just leave them out :-) The non-executable, maybe a root,755,root %attr for it? The warning about the non conf file can be ignored, since it is a config file I see the spec file uses: [ -n "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" -a "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] && rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT This was a standard (a good while ago) but the current guidelines say to just use: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT If no one else has stepped up for review yet, i'll be willing too, changing blocker to FE-REVIEW. Fix the issues mentioned in the comments (including this one :-)) and once thats done i'll do the full 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 Jan 12 21:41:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:41:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122141.k0CLfH4I028107@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 16:41 EST ------- Actually rpm -ql mysql-gui-common tells me it only contains language (.mo) files and all the png's and a couple of glade files the apps use So the description is wrong in this case -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:48:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122148.k0CLmC07029664@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at ausil.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dennis at ausil.us ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 16:47 EST ------- there is no smp x86_64 kernel in fc5 there should be a check for version and only enable smp variant on the targets that support it devel i386 has i586 and i686 up, i686 smp, i686 xen (one for hypervisor and one for client) x86_64 has just the one kernel ppc in devel has up , smp there is however a ppc64iseries and ppc64 kernel in the ppc tree fc4 i386 same as devel x86_64 has UP and SMP ppc same as devel fc3 i386 has i586 and i686 UP and SMP kernels x86_64 same as fc4 So there is alot of variants need to be taken into consideration -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 21:53:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:53:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122153.k0CLrPkf030605@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 16:53 EST ------- It would also be ok to do: %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnome-yum in the files list, no need to type out all the file names really, and otherwise you wouldn't own the directory for the config file mentioned above, try putting %config(noreplace) before them (pam.d/gnome-yum and console.apps/gnome-yum), which is proper thing to do with config files also it might be usefull to put gettext in the build requires, while i've never seen a live fedora system without, mock does need to know about it else it might trip over 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 Thu Jan 12 21:57:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:57:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122157.k0CLvfmo031338@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 16:57 EST ------- one thing I just picked up when building the module /home/dennis/redhat/BUILD/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1/up/zaptel-1.2.1/ztdummy.c:103:2: warning: #warning This module will not be usable since the kernel HZ setting is not 1000 ticks per second. the ztdummy module says it wont work. this is the one module most people will want to use. as its needed for conference room timing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 22:00:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:00:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122200.k0CM0iA6031894@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-12 17:00 EST ------- Desktop file should be parsed with desktop-file-install, adding the Fedora category, and add desktop-file-utils to the buildrequires Lastly there's no need for the: [ ! -f Makefile ] || make distclean line is there? If gnome-yum does its releases properly it should never be shipped with a Makefile -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 22:30:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:30:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177588] Review Request: mysql-administrator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122230.k0CMURqK004575@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-administrator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-12 17:30 EST ------- i pulled the description from the README file in the mysql-gui-common tree. i have been trying to work out the best way to build mysql-query-browser also. as it needs some of the files that get built in mysql-gui-common tree but not installed i think i will patch the Makefile to install the neccesary files and create a mysql-gui-common-devel package with them. I will remove the redundant Requires removing the mysql-gui-common package if i try and start mysql-administrator i get [dennis at rpclnx001 ~]$ mysql-administrator (mysql-administrator-bin:4147): libglade-WARNING **: could not find glade file '/usr/share/mysql-gui/common/preferences.glade' terminate called after throwing an instance of 'MGGladeXML::Error' /usr/bin/mysql-administrator: line 19: 4147 Aborted $PRG-bin so it is loading at least one glade file at run time I should change the description to be more appropriate perhaps: this package contains glade files images and translations used by mysql tools at runtime -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 12 23:53:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:53:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177401] Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601122353.k0CNrOsQ018362@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-12 18:53 EST ------- 1. Fixed. 2. Fixed. 3. for now I just left it root-owned. 4. Naming is tricky, because the software (and the tarball) is called clamsmtp by its author, even though the daemon is clamsmtpd and the config file is clamsmtpd.conf. What should I do then? 5. Fixed. Thanks for the comments! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 00:28:33 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:28:33 +0000 Subject: Plague-client config settings Message-ID: <1137112113.3047.10.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, I've finally managed to get my act together and have started to upload some new packages for extras. I've installed plague-client but have hit a snag when it comes to requesting a make build. I get the following error /usr/bin/plague-client build z88dk z88dk-1_6-7_fc5 devel Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' Looking in .plague-client.cfg, this is at the bottom for the server config [server] use_ssl = yes upload_user = me allow_uploads = yes address = https://127.0.0.1:8887 I'll hazard a guess that this is completely wrong (well, the user and address at least!). Should the upload_user be my CVS login and what should the address be? TTFN Paul -- main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0 From chabotc at xs4all.nl Fri Jan 13 00:35:13 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:35:13 +0100 Subject: Plague-client config settings In-Reply-To: <1137112113.3047.10.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <001901c617d9$37dab520$9800000a@chabotc> There's a plague client config, plus 2 more certificate files you need in the fedora project wiki You can find all these goodies here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildSystemClientSetup -----Original Message----- From: fedora-extras-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:fedora-extras-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Paul Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 01:29 To: fedora-extras Subject: Plague-client config settings Hi, I've finally managed to get my act together and have started to upload some new packages for extras. I've installed plague-client but have hit a snag when it comes to requesting a make build. I get the following error /usr/bin/plague-client build z88dk z88dk-1_6-7_fc5 devel Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' Looking in .plague-client.cfg, this is at the bottom for the server config [server] use_ssl = yes upload_user = me allow_uploads = yes address = https://127.0.0.1:8887 I'll hazard a guess that this is completely wrong (well, the user and address at least!). Should the upload_user be my CVS login and what should the address be? TTFN Paul -- main(t,_,a) char*a;{return!0 Message-ID: <200601130044.k0D0iU2h026194@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-12 19:44 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > Sent a email to the builder of nucleo > > > Nicolas Roussel > to me > More options 6:44 am (10 hours ago) > Hi, > > > I have a problem building nucleo into a RPM. > > I think I've fixed the problem. Could you try again with this one: > > http://insitu.lri.fr/~roussel/software/src/nucleo-2006-01-11.tar.bz2 > > Your log indicates that configure isn't able to find the OpenGL, > JPEG, PNG > and FreeType libraries. even if nucleo compiles, you won't be able to > do much > without all these > > will attempt to build nucleo again Does anyone used that versionning tarball to build srpms? So far I cannot use that tarball to build it. Maybe the author should mention which version is nucleo (0.5.0 or 0.5.1 for example). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 13 00:56:41 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:56:41 +0000 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137113801.3085.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 18:44 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Agreed. My vote: Only build for the newest one. I agree. When there's a kernel update, a whole bunch of kernel modules get updated. You don't get to pick and choose which of those you update; it's all or nothing. I see absolutely no reason why that shouldn't also be the case for external modules. Perhaps there's a case for building once for old kernels when we first add a kmod package to Extras -- but not for updates. -- dwmw2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 01:11:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:11:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130111.k0D1BbpJ029370@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-12 20:11 EST ------- Here is a link to the latest source and spec files http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/src/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 01:17:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:17:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177082] Review Request: wm-icons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130117.k0D1Hccv030245@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-12 20:17 EST ------- Here is a sucessfull build of wm-icons in mock I have included everything mock produced http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/mock-wm-icons-0.3.0-3/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 02:23:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:23:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130223.k0D2N5qd008807@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 166960 depends on bug 171801, which changed state. Bug 171801 Summary: Review Request: libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk - libraries required for the fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171801 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 Fri Jan 13 02:25:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:25:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130225.k0D2Pd61009279@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 167364 depends on bug 166960, which changed state. Bug 166960 Summary: Review Request: Fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 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 Fri Jan 13 02:55:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:55:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130255.k0D2tsPG013631@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-12 21:55 EST ------- I've succesfully built the devel branch with mock; you only need to replace xorg-x11-devel with libXpm-devel in the spec's BR. All other X libraries needed were already being pulled in by other BRs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 13 04:21:59 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:21:59 +0100 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 18:44 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 12.01.2006, 11:56 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > We can't possibly rebuild modules for every previously released kernel.[...] > > Agreed. My vote: Only build for the newest one. > > ; Answer: Ralf, let's build > only for the newest one in the beginning. If that doesn't work we can > still come back to this point and discuss it anew. Sorry, Thorsten, but building for the latest kernel only is not sufficient. Despite I can feel your pain, you *can't avoid* building at least for the (latest-1) kernel, because during updates to the latest kernel, a system's current rpmdb can contain dependencies on the current (== latest-1) kernel - An example for such kind of situations is you current nvidia kernel-module/glx packages. Without adding at least (latest-1) kernel related packages, even users tracking Fedora closely and updating frequently won't be able to update kernel-modules. Note: They won't be able to update from (latest-1) to (latest) on systems running (latest-1)! > > This is simply a question of how many > > factors do we care about here. [...] > > Did I miss anything? Yes, c.f. above. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 06:18:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:18:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130618.k0D6IAJh013489@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From i at stingr.net 2006-01-13 01:17 EST ------- Maybe something like this %{__perl} -pi -e 's|\$\(INSTALL_BASE\)/lib|%{_libdir}|g' Makefile will be easier to maintain than additional patch file? Digium folks are knowh by randomly changing layout of their makefiles... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 06:18:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:18:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130618.k0D6IKE8013534@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 01:18 EST ------- Jeffrey, you know that we're still considering switching to another, slightly modified proposal? One where you don't have to hard-code the kernel-variants in the spec-file (would avoid problems like the ones in comments #2 to #4 in the future) You should probably be a bit patient and wait for the final version of the kernel-module packaging standard. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 06:22:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:22:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130622.k0D6M7bu013983@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From i at stingr.net 2006-01-13 01:21 EST ------- P.S. This is the specfile I'm using in my installations: http://stingr.net/l/libpri.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 fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 13 06:45:07 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:45:07 +0100 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1137134707.2608.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 13.01.2006, 05:21 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 18:44 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 12.01.2006, 11:56 -0500 schrieb Dan Williams: > > > We can't possibly rebuild modules for every previously released kernel.[...] > > Agreed. My vote: Only build for the newest one. > > ; Answer: Ralf, let's build > > only for the newest one in the beginning. If that doesn't work we can > > still come back to this point and discuss it anew. > Sorry, Thorsten, but building for the latest kernel only is not sufficient. > > Despite I can feel your pain, you *can't avoid* building at least for > the (latest-1) kernel, because during updates to the latest kernel, a > system's current rpmdb can contain dependencies on the current (== > latest-1) kernel - An example for such kind of situations is you current > nvidia kernel-module/glx packages. nvidia kernel-module/glx packages use a complete different scheme, that has a problem which could be solved this way, yes. But that is not what we're talking about here. > Without adding at least (latest-1) kernel related packages, even users > tracking Fedora closely and updating frequently won't be able to update > kernel-modules. > > Note: They won't be able to update from (latest-1) to (latest) on > systems running (latest-1)! Prove it please *with the new scheme*. Seems I'm to dumb to see the problem (if there is any). Either test it in a real world situation and show me the error or *precisely* describe why or where yum/rpm would fail (I know that you know yum/rpm enough to do that). -- Thorsten Leemhuis From ville.skytta at iki.fi Fri Jan 13 06:59:43 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:59:43 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 18:48 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > How about the attached stuff? Find a SRPM for experiments at > http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/SRPMS.fdr/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.7.pre3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4.src.rpm I think the part of this experiment that handles variants is definitely an improvement, assuming that the build system will be capable of passing the correct variants to the builds. Can we assume that? The other part that shuffles stuff around %prep/%build/%install can result in specfile simplifications, but the burden is that it requires a robustly working "make clean". Not that it would be necessarily that big a deal, but I think it's a pretty unusual requirement for packaged software and shouldn't be included in template/example specfiles. I'm confident that similar simplifications/cleanups can be accomplished without adding that burden. I'll look into it. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 08:48:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:48:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130848.k0D8mprl003535@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-13 03:48 EST ------- test build on x86_64 rawhide succeeded and spec looks good 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 08:49:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:49:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601130849.k0D8npXf003807@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 ------- Additional Comments From che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-13 03:49 EST ------- test build on x86_64 rawhide succeeded and spec looks good 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 12:34:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:34:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131234.k0DCY2UD006253@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-13 07:33 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > A few questions/comments before doing a full review: Thanks for having a look and sorry for the delay. I have been travelling. > 1) What's the purpose of the section define at the top of the spec file? I'm > assuming it's somehow related to jpackage... Yes, this package has been borrowed from the JPackage Project with minimal changes. The JPackage provides both Free and non-Free Software packages. This is how they indicate which section the package belongs to. I can remove this from the FE package, but my goal was to make as few changes as possible in order to ease merging down the road. > 2) We tend to avoid doing, eg, jpp or the like in release tags All of the packages in Fedora Core that have are derived from JPackage Project packages have jpp in the release tag. I'm not sure I agree that it's a good idea, but I was just following FC existing practice. > 3) Using %{summary}. for summaries is odd -- that doesn't describe what the > purpose of the subpackage is. Also, you'll end up with double periods like that I agree. I'll fix that and submit the fix to the JPackage project as well. > 4) You shouldn't need the javadoc %postun as that should get handled by the fact > that the file is ghosted. Ok, same with this. Thanks - I'll post a new package shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 13 13:10:43 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:10:43 -0500 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <1137134707.2608.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137134707.2608.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910601130510hfb5c661p7ca87bbe73302245@mail.gmail.com> On 1/13/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Prove it please *with the new scheme*. Seems I'm to dumb to see the > problem (if there is any). Are there some mockup kernel modules/userspace packages that use the new scheme. I'm more than happy to brutalize them as a user looking for unforseen problems. Can you spin up an example set of srpms.. even if they don't have any real payload files? -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 13:21:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:21:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131321.k0DDLFme012046@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 08:21 EST ------- /me completely confused -- this package was imported to cvs, the bug closed, but I can't see a "approved" anywhere here. Did I miss anything? Only libspectrum, lib765 and libdsk from Bug 17180 got and approved afaics. And Paul, why didn't you rename it to fuse-emulator-utils as you said yourself in comment #2 to avoid confusion with Fuse, the "Filesystem in Userspace"? Yes, it has no "fuse-uils" subpackage, but that could change in the future. And it's confusing anyway -- fuse-emulator-utils would be the better name imho. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 13:24:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:24:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131324.k0DDOmMX012829@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-13 08:24 EST ------- Here are the updated files for review... Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext-1.3-1jpp_3.src.rpm Thanks, AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 13 13:32:56 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:32:56 +0100 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601130510hfb5c661p7ca87bbe73302245@mail.gmail.com> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137134707.2608.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601130510hfb5c661p7ca87bbe73302245@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137159176.18078.18.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 13.01.2006, 08:10 -0500 schrieb Jeff Spaleta: > On 1/13/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Prove it please *with the new scheme*. Seems I'm to dumb to see the > > problem (if there is any). > > Are there some mockup kernel modules/userspace packages that use the > new scheme. The URLs were posted before in the other kmod-thread: Two real-life examples can be found at: Lirc; Userland (in addition to the lirc package in cvs; note this practically results in three SRPMS for lirc -- the lirc-kmod-common part was split out for other maintaining reasons, normally it should be a subpackage of the normal lirc package) http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-common-0.8.0-2.src.rpm Kernel-Module: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.6.pre3.2.6.15_1.1819_FC5.src.rpm Thinkpad; Useland: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-common-5.8-5.src.rpm Kernel-Module: http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-6.2.6.15_1.1819_FC5.src.rpm And the last stuff from the discussion that is still considered a bit experimental; But it's the one I'd like to use (if others agree) is found here: http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/SRPMS.fdr/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.7.pre3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4.src.rpm Ohh, and Jack Neely did some for openafs: http://linuxczar.net/openafs/ > I'm more than happy to brutalize them as a user looking > for unforseen problems. Great! HTH CU thl From jeff at ocjtech.us Fri Jan 13 13:49:08 2006 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey C. Ollie) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:49:08 -0600 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601130510hfb5c661p7ca87bbe73302245@mail.gmail.com> References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> <1137087870.4998.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137126119.17219.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137134707.2608.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601130510hfb5c661p7ca87bbe73302245@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137160148.2728.8.camel@lt16585.campus.dmacc.edu> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 08:10 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/13/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Prove it please *with the new scheme*. Seems I'm to dumb to see the > > problem (if there is any). > > Are there some mockup kernel modules/userspace packages that use the > new scheme. I'm more than happy to brutalize them as a user looking > for unforseen problems. Can you spin up an example set of srpms.. > even if they don't have any real payload files? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 Jeff Ollie -------------- 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 Jan 13 13:49:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:49:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131349.k0DDnRVL017210@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-13 08:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Jeffrey, you know that we're still considering switching to another, slightly > modified proposal? One where you don't have to hard-code the kernel-variants in > the spec-file (would avoid problems like the ones in comments #2 to #4 in the > future) > > You should probably be a bit patient and wait for the final version of the > kernel-module packaging standard. I'll keep updating my packages as the proposal evolves, but I really hope that something comes together soon. People have been waiting for a long time for Asterisk in Fedora Extras, and getting Zaptel approved is a necessary first step. I think that packaging the Zaptel modules will serve as a good test case for the kernel module proposal. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 14:52:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:52:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131452.k0DEqHUL028423@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-13 09:52 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-4.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.1-4.src.rpm Fixes issues from comment #5 and picks up a few tips from the spec linked in #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 Fri Jan 13 14:53:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:53:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131453.k0DErUCN028671@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 09:53 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > > You should probably be a bit patient and wait for the final version of the > > kernel-module packaging standard. > > I'll keep updating my packages as the proposal evolves, Okay. That's your decision and might be a bit more work, but probably is a good idea in general because it helps testing that the proposal really works ;-) > but I really hope that something comes together soon. I think so -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 14:59:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:59:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131459.k0DExBFk029541@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-13 09:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > one thing I just picked up when building the module > /home/dennis/redhat/BUILD/zaptel-kmod-1.2.1/up/zaptel-1.2.1/ztdummy.c:103:2: > warning: #warning This module will not be usable since the kernel HZ setting > is not 1000 ticks per second. > > the ztdummy module says it wont work. this is the one module most people > will want to use as its needed for conference room timing. Which kernel/arch is this with? I haven't run across this with my testing, but I've only tested with a small cross-section of systems. Unfortunately, this is the way that Digium built the system. Replacing the code in Asterisk that depends on Zaptel kernel modules for anything but accessing real Zaptel hardware is technically possible but that isn't something that Digium seems to think is a very high priority. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 14:59:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:59:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131459.k0DEx8Q8029531@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 09:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > 4) The problem with using "make install" is that it would force a build of the > device drivers (which are built in a separate package), as well as running a > large number of other commands that are inappropriate to be run as part of the > packaging process. You really should use "make install" and remove the part of the makefile that builds the module; use a patch during %prep -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 15:03:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:03:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131503.k0DF35Wl029942@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-13 10:02 EST ------- D'oh! For some reason, I thought that it had been approved. I'll remove it from cvs when I get home. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 15:19:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:19:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131519.k0DFJT6q000568@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 10:19 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > D'oh! For some reason, I thought that it had been approved. You probably should reopen Bug 166960 , too. I'll repair the damage which you have done to fuse (the filesystem) myself. > I'll remove it from cvs when I get home. Don't know if it's that easy. Might be the best if you ask for removal on http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 13 15:27:47 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:27:47 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 13.01.2006, 08:59 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 18:48 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > How about the attached stuff? Find a SRPM for experiments at > > http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/SRPMS.fdr/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.7.pre3.2.6.14_1.1776_FC4.src.rpm I'm still wondering why the feedback was so rare on this experiment with fedora-kmodhelper. Was it to scary? I know it looks a bit unusual in the first moment, but I think this solution (with a bit polishing) is the best we found so far. Panu, dwmw2, Jeremey, skvidal, mschwendt, Anvil, warren, everybody else interested: What do you think about it? > I think the part of this experiment that handles variants is definitely > an improvement, assuming that the build system will be capable of > passing the correct variants to the builds. Can we assume that? I did not talk to dcbw about that yet but will do that soon. Anyway, we still can hardcode the kvariants if it does not work in the beginning. > The other part that shuffles stuff around %prep/%build/%install can > result in specfile simplifications, Agreed. And there is an additional benefit: the debug-packages are a lot smaller if you build more then one > but the burden is that it requires a > robustly working "make clean". Not that it would be necessarily that > big a deal, but I think it's a pretty unusual requirement for packaged > software and shouldn't be included in template/example specfiles. I'm > confident that similar simplifications/cleanups can be accomplished > without adding that burden. I'll look into it. Great, thx. I'll wait for the results. This part anyway is independent of the fedora-kmodhelper thing. /me thinks about the whole situation for a moment If no one complains loudly soon about this fedora-kmodhelper idea in above srpm then I think I'll work on modifying the last extras-kmod-proposal to a solution with the fedora-kmodhelper scheme. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 13 15:33:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:33:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131533.k0DFXQeB003070@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-13 10:33 EST ------- Hello Roozbeh, I cannot approve this package but I have some suggestions. * Strip the math executable with: install -s math/texvc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{wikidir}/math * go ahead and make the math portion a different package * I noticed mediawiki-install.txt is included as a source but is not included in the RPM after it gets built, perhaps that should go under %docs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 15:41:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131541.k0DFf3Z7005097@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-13 10:40 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Hello Roozbeh, I cannot approve this package but I have some suggestions. > > * Strip the math executable with: > install -s math/texvc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{wikidir}/math Executables should not be stripped like this because it results in useless debuginfo packages. The rpmbuild process should automatically strip out the debug symbols and put them in the debuginfo 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 Fri Jan 13 15:42:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:42:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131542.k0DFguZv005510@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-13 10:42 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-2.src.rpm The devel subpackage needs to require the main 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 Fri Jan 13 15:45:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:45:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131545.k0DFjubq006520@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-13 10:45 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > 4) The problem with using "make install" is that it would force a build of the > > device drivers (which are built in a separate package), as well as running a > > large number of other commands that are inappropriate to be run as part of the > > packaging process. > > You really should use "make install" and remove the part of the makefile that > builds the module; use a patch during %prep Hmm... the install section of the Makefile would require *EXTREME* surgery. Unless it's going to block approval of the package I'd rather install the files that I need manually in the spec until the upstream package gets 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 Fri Jan 13 15:50:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:50:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131550.k0DFoAgM007710@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-13 10:49 EST ------- So this rpmlint message should be ignored? W: mediawiki unstripped-binary-or-object /var/www/mediawiki/math/texvc (I am fairly new at reviewing packages) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 16:00:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:00:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131600.k0DG05qh009415@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-13 10:59 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > So this rpmlint message should be ignored? > > W: mediawiki unstripped-binary-or-object /var/www/mediawiki/math/texvc Most likely no; it should be fixed instead so that rpmbuild can strip it. Some cases where rpmbuild is (was) not able to strip binaries include files installed without write permissions for the package builder, and setuid/setgid binaries (bug 117858). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 16:04:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:04:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177235] Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131604.k0DG4VgP010478@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-13 11:04 EST ------- Two minor issues that you should resolve before building: - Development/Building is a non-standard Group setting. I know that Group is pretty worthless right now, but please try to keep to the Fedora Standards found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups - The autotools that you're using (autoconf/automake) should be listed as BuildRequires. Also, you should consider using %{?dist} at the end of the Release, if you plan to build this for multiple branches (FC-3,FC-4,FC-5). See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag Review: - rpmlint checks return: W: sysconftool non-standard-group Development/Building (noted above) W: sysconftool symlink-should-be-relative /usr/bin/sysconftoolize /usr/share/sysconftool/sysconftoolize.pl W: sysconftool symlink-should-be-relative /usr/bin/sysconftoolcheck /usr/share/sysconftool/sysconftoolcheck Safe to ignore these symlinks. - 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 - spec localized for en_US, pl, ok - 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 This package is approved, with the caveat that you resolve the two minor issues before building. Also, I'll sponsor you based on this package (and your Aurora related work). Go ahead and do your paperwork. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 16:38:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:38:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131638.k0DGc1XK018084@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-13 11:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Hmm... the install section of the Makefile would require *EXTREME* surgery. Really? I took a quick look. From a first glance I would presume that removing everything between - if [ -f zaptel.ko ]; then \ and - fi should be enough. > Unless it's going to block approval of the package I'm not the reviewer. But if was I would consider it a blocker. > I'd rather install the files > that I need manually in the spec until the upstream package gets fixed. I did something like that in the past -- you have to recheck after each upstream update that you still install everything exactly as the makefile would do it. And that is a lot of work and often is forgotten (and that's the reason why I think it's a blocker). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 17:08:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:08:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131708.k0DH8fjh023278@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-13 12:08 EST ------- kernel 2.6.15_1.1826.2.9_FC5 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 Fri Jan 13 17:26:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:26:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166414] Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131726.k0DHQf3d026308@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: grace (Numerical Data Processing and Visualization Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166414 ------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt 2006-01-13 12:26 EST ------- Thank you. That was precisely the kind of analysis I was trying to do. In this case it was easy due to the number of X components required. :-) I ordered a build, so now grace should be available also for 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 Fri Jan 13 17:37:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:37:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177747] New: Review Request: glade3 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=177747 Summary: Review Request: glade3 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: i386 URL: http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/GNOME/sources/glade-3/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: bbbush.yuan at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com >From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; zh-CN; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5 Description of problem: Glade is a free user interface builder for GTK+ and GNOME. After designing a user interface with glade-2 the layout and configuration are saved in an XML file. Glade3 is the latest development version and need help. Glade2-2.12.1 is the latest stable in Fedora Core. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): glade3-2.90.0 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.none. 2. 3. Additional info: I need someone to help me, to improve this spec. I don't know if this small package can live with only 1 warning with rpmlint, or it should be warning free. What should I do to make it warning free? Should I seperate the package to three: glade3, libgladeui, libgladeui-devel? I don't know how to proceed with this idea. The spec is here in fedora-gro cvs, http://gro.clinux.org/scm/cvsweb.php/rpms/g/glade3/?cvsroot=fedora BTW, It could co-exist with glade2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 17:53:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:53:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177235] Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131753.k0DHrvqx031964@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 rpm at greysector.net 2006-01-13 12:53 EST ------- Fixed all issues, including symlinks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 18:00:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:00:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131800.k0DI0ubt000771@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-13 13:00 EST ------- Sorry for the delay, I should be able to pick this backup this evening and get further along on the mandatory review items. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 18:02:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:02:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131802.k0DI2n65001188@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-13 13:02 EST ------- uhm i dont actually see 0.21-3 at http://people.redhat.com/nalin/oddjob/extras/ Can you clarify where 0.21-3 is so I can grab it this evening? -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 13 18:10:20 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:10:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060113181020.B5DA98012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 11 cogito-0.16.2-2.fc3 digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc3 git-1.1.0-1.fc3 git-1.1.1-1.fc3 grace-5.1.19-1.fc3 ipython-0.7.0-1.fc3 perl-Digest-MD2-2.03-1.fc3 perl-File-Remove-0.31-1.fc3 perl-Module-Build-0.2611-2.fc3 perl-Params-Util-0.09-1.fc3 python-psyco-1.5-3.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 Fri Jan 13 18:16:38 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:16:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060113181638.D3BE58012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 25 awstats-6.5-1.fc4 baobab-2.3.1-1.fc4 cogito-0.16.2-2.fc4 gazpacho-0.6.4-1.fc4 git-1.1.0-1.fc4 git-1.1.1-1.fc4 gobby-0.3.0-2.fc4 grace-5.1.19-1.fc4 ipython-0.7.0-1.fc4 kbibtex-0.1.3-3.fc4 mysql-administrator-1.1.5-3.fc4 perl-Digest-MD2-2.03-1.fc4 perl-File-Remove-0.31-1.fc4 perl-Module-Build-0.2611-2.fc4 perl-Params-Util-0.09-1.fc4 psi-0.10-1.fc4 pylint-0.9.0-1.fc4 python-astng-0.14.0-1.fc4 python-basemap-0.7.2.1-1.fc4 python-basemap-data-0.7-1 python-feedparser-4.1-1.fc4 python-logilab-common-0.13.0-1.fc4 python-matplotlib-0.86-1.fc4 python-psyco-1.5-3.fc4 trac-0.9.3-2.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 Fri Jan 13 18:13:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:13:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601131813.k0DIDvmx003572@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-13 13:13 EST ------- After venturing a guess i found it for you, it's in http://people.redhat.com/nalin/oddjob/ (without the 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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 13 18:32:09 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:32:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060113183209.53F5D8012@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 37 awstats-6.5-1.fc5 baobab-2.3.1-1.fc5 cogito-0.16.2-2.fc5 denyhosts-1.1.4-1.fc5 digikamimageplugins-0.8.0-1.fc5 fuse-utils-0.7.0-1.fc5 gazpacho-0.6.4-1.fc5 git-1.1.0-1.fc5 git-1.1.1-1.fc5 gparted-0.1-1.fc5 grace-5.1.19-1.fc5 ipython-0.7.0-1.fc5 kbibtex-0.1.3-3.fc5 lib765-0.3.3-3.fc5 libdsk-1.1.6-1.fc5 libspectrum-0.2.2-4.fc5 mysql-administrator-1.1.5-3.fc5 paps-0.6.3-1.fc5 perl-BerkeleyDB-0.27-1.fc5 perl-Config-General-2.31-1.fc5 perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder-1.38-1.fc5 perl-DateTime-0.30-1.fc5 perl-Exception-Class-1.22-1.fc5 perl-File-Remove-0.31-1.fc5 perl-HTML-Mason-1.32-1.fc5 perl-Params-Util-0.09-1.fc5 psi-0.10-1.fc5 pylint-0.9.0-1.fc5 python-astng-0.14.0-1.fc5 python-feedparser-4.1-1.fc5 python-logilab-common-0.13.0-1.fc5 python-matplotlib-0.86-1.fc5 python-psyco-1.5-3.fc5 shorewall-3.0.4-1.fc5 sylpheed-claws-2.0.0-0.rc3.fc5 tcldom-3.1-3.fc5 tclxml-3.1-6.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 Fri Jan 13 21:54:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:54:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173054] Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601132154.k0DLs0cp014999@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavpack - completely open audiocodec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173054 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-13 16:53 EST ------- To most users, 4.40 looks newer than 4.4.0 while 4.3.1 looks older than 4.31. ;-) And you still want to stay close to upstream versioning scheme. (the fun starts when you feel the need to bump %{epoch}) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 22:10:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:10:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601132210.k0DMAdls017355@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-13 17:10 EST ------- Lint results: # rpmlint wine-docs-0.9.5-1.src.rpm E: wine-docs configure-without-libdir-spec - could be ignored, nothing libbed here. # rpmlint wine-docs-0.9.5-1.noarch.rpm W: wine-docs no-version-in-last-changelog That thing again. Not much to care about here. Docs are placed in /usr/share/doc/wine-docs-0.9.5, perhaps one would prefer /usr/share/doc/wine-0.9.5 but who cares. GOOD: * Package name matches spec file name * Meets package naming guidelines (child package docs) * FLOSS-compatible license (LGPL) * spec file is in american english * spec file is readable indeed * sources match upstream (MD5SUM is the same) * builds fine on FC4 * no exceptionized BuildRequires * all build dependencies listed * no locale magic needed * no libraries installed * non-relocatable * owns its directories (implicit since %doc tag is used) * no duplicate files * proper permissions on files * proper %clean section * proper use of macros I think, should %configure be used instead of ./configure? NEEDSWORK: * License field is wrong: tagged GPL but is LGPL (COPYING.LIB) * The license file MUST be %doc:ed Fix these and it's a 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 Fri Jan 13 22:15:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:15:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601132215.k0DMF7ok017898@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-13 17:15 EST ------- Also did a mock on fc4 and devel, both completed fine. Still hoping someone will be in a reviewing mood, don't suppose you have the time Rudolf? :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 22:27:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 17:27:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] New: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder 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=177782 Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/byzanz-0.0.3-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/byzanz-0.0.3-1.src.rpm Description: Byzanz is a desktop recorder. Just like Istanbul. But it doesn't record to Ogg Theora, but to GIF. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 13 23:54:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:54:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601132354.k0DNspxb000420@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-13 18:54 EST ------- Fixed the NEEDSWORK things... as to configure: If I remeber correctly it failed with %configure ... Here you go and thanks for your time :) http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/wine-docs-0.9.5-2.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 steve at silug.org Sat Jan 14 01:03:23 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:03:23 -0600 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > e-mail address. Nice. While we're sharing, here's a script I wrote to check the status of all the perl packages I'm the owner of. It compares the version of the package in the spec file to the version of the module on CPAN. Fixing the hard-coded values is left as an exercise for the reader. ;) 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 -------------- next part -------------- #!/bin/sh set -e wget="wget -q" cvs="cvs -q -z1" me="steve at silug.org" owners=/home/steve/src/fedora/extras/owners rpms=/home/steve/src/fedora/extras/rpms CPAN=${CPAN:-"http://www.cpan.org"} packages=$HOME/.cpan/sources/modules/02packages.details.txt.gz mkdir -p $( dirname $packages ) echo "Updating CPAN package details..." $wget -N -O $packages $CPAN/modules/$( basename $packages ) cd $owners echo "Updating owners.list from Fedora Extras CVS..." $cvs up for package in $( grep $me owners.list | cut -d'|' -f2 | grep '^perl-' ) ; do echo "Updating $package..." ( cd $rpms && $cvs up $package ) echo "Checking $package..." if [ ! -d $rpms/$package/devel ] ; then echo " - No devel/, skipping..." continue fi module=$( echo $package | sed 's,^perl-,,;s/-/::/g' ) cpanversion=$( zgrep '^'$module' ' $packages | awk '{print $2}' ) pkgversion=$( grep '^Version:' $rpms/$package/devel/$package.spec \ | awk '{print $2}' ) if [ $cpanversion != $pkgversion ] ; then echo " *** MISMATCH: devel is $pkgversion, CPAN is $cpanversion." >&2 else echo "$package is up-to-date!" fi done # vi: set ai et: From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 01:32:51 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:32:51 -0500 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> On 1/13/06, Steven Pritchard wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > > e-mail address. > > Nice. While we're sharing, Wouldn't useful scripts like this be best archived in the Extras area of the Wiki? -jef From Matt_Domsch at dell.com Sat Jan 14 02:19:16 2006 From: Matt_Domsch at dell.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:19:16 -0600 Subject: Kernel module permutation problems In-Reply-To: References: <1137084991.3444.15.camel@dhcp83-84.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060114021916.GA22355@lists.us.dell.com> On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 10:23:45PM +0100, Paul Wouters wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Dan Williams wrote: > > > 1) UP, SMP, hugemen, XEN > > 2) i586, i686, x86_64, em64t, ppc32, ppc64, ia64 > > 3) How many past kernels to rebuild for > > > > Even with just these 3, we get at _least_ 30 different kernel module > > RPMs (3 "flavors", minimum of 5 arches, 2 past kernels). That's a huge > > number. > > > > Questions: > > > > Is this really what we want? > > I think so :( > > > This is all independent of the actual specfile mechanisms and mechanics > > of rebuilding the modules. This is simply a question of how many > > factors do we care about here. It's not out of the question to start > > small and grow the permutations out as we go along and add more > > architectures, flavors, etc. > > The way FreeS/WAN did this in the past was to build one rpm with all > flavour kernel modules, and upon installation detect which module > you need and link as the actual .ko file. DKMS solves this by including driver source, and pre-compiled modules for as many kernel/flavor/arch combinations as is desired in a single tarball in a single RPM. Not exactly elegant, the tarball, but extremely effective. Then we have just one RPM per driver version, not one RPM per kernel version per flavor per driver version per arch... -- 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 jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sat Jan 14 03:18:59 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:18:59 -0600 Subject: GPG key really needed? Message-ID: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Ok, so I'm trying to figure out what good uploading a GPG key into the accounts system is. Here's how I see it: 1. The only thing it's used for is potentially signing the CLA. I say potentially because both http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/RequestCLA and http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem say "You can sign the CLA". If it's required, we should change it to "must sign the CLA". 2. Even if 1) is done, we don't use GPG keys for anything else. We don't sign packages with them. Using them to sign emails is fine, but it's not required. And there is no listing of contributors and their GPG keys so finding a users GPG key has to be done via searches on key servers anyway. So... is it really needed? Or maybe a better question is can we make it more useful somehow? josh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 03:23:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140323.k0E3N2Ju024682@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-13 22:22 EST ------- I've added a patch so RSSOwl now attempts (via java-gnome) to use the user's default browser instead of always launching "mozilla". Updated files here... Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-5.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 nman64 at n-man.com Sat Jan 14 03:53:13 2006 From: nman64 at n-man.com (Patrick Barnes) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:53:13 -0600 Subject: GPG key really needed? In-Reply-To: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> Josh Boyer wrote: > Ok, so I'm trying to figure out what good uploading a GPG key into the > accounts system is. Here's how I see it: > > 1. The only thing it's used for is potentially signing the CLA. I say > potentially because both > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/RequestCLA > > and > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem > > say "You can sign the CLA". If it's required, we should change it to > "must sign the CLA". > They read "can" and not "must" due to the option of using a written signature and postal courier. CLAs may also not be necessary in all cases. > 2. Even if 1) is done, we don't use GPG keys for anything else. We > don't sign packages with them. > > Using them to sign emails is fine, but it's not required. And there is > no listing of contributors and their GPG keys so finding a users GPG key > has to be done via searches on key servers anyway. > > So... is it really needed? Or maybe a better question is can we make > it more useful somehow? > > josh > > Part of it is availability. It is likely that more use of GPG keys will be made in the future. It is also important that when the time comes that your GPG key is needed, we can verify that it is the same key as you have provided to the account system. It is also possible to verify the GPG key ID for any particular user in the Account System, which the paranoid or thorough are free to do. Anyone can check what GPG key ID another user has registered in the Account System, but you are correct in that there is no single list. You must specify the single account you wish to check. Really, all contributions that are provided through an insecure means *should* be GPG-signed, though this is not enforced. -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64 at n-man.com http://www.n-man.com/ -- Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sat Jan 14 04:26:57 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:26:57 -0600 Subject: GPG key really needed? In-Reply-To: <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> References: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> Message-ID: <1137212820.13376.31.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 21:53 -0600, Patrick Barnes wrote: > Josh Boyer wrote: > > Ok, so I'm trying to figure out what good uploading a GPG key into the > > accounts system is. Here's how I see it: > > > > 1. The only thing it's used for is potentially signing the CLA. I say > > potentially because both > > > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/RequestCLA > > > > and > > > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem > > > > say "You can sign the CLA". If it's required, we should change it to > > "must sign the CLA". > > > They read "can" and not "must" due to the option of using a written > signature and postal courier. CLAs may also not be necessary in all cases. Could we change them to say "If you submit the CLA via email, you must sign it with your GPG key" or something similar then? > > So... is it really needed? Or maybe a better question is can we make > > it more useful somehow? > > > Part of it is availability. It is likely that more use of GPG keys will > be made in the future. It is also important that when the time comes > that your GPG key is needed, we can verify that it is the same key as > you have provided to the account system. It is also possible to verify But in the meantime, folks that don't use GPG keys for any other reason are probably forgetting passwords for them, deleting them on accident, etc. In the future is fine, but could you elaborate on what the future use may be? > the GPG key ID for any particular user in the Account System, which the > paranoid or thorough are free to do. Anyone can check what GPG key ID > another user has registered in the Account System, but you are correct > in that there is no single list. You must specify the single account Such a list wouldn't be hard to generate though, would it? > you wish to check. Really, all contributions that are provided through > an insecure means *should* be GPG-signed, though this is not enforced. Can you elaborate on what contributions you're talking about? Email, maybe. Though I doubt signing everything is all that important. Anything else you're thinking of? josh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 06:23:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:23:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140623.k0E6NPGC016358@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-14 01:23 EST ------- I meant that I couldn't find any errors using rpmlint and mock. Sorry if you found my comment a bit offensive as it seems my quote failes to bring positive appreciation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 07:51:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:51:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140751.k0E7pLev026373@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 triad at df.lth.se changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-14 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 Sat Jan 14 08:20:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 03:20:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170978] Review Request: nomadsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140820.k0E8K5Kb029654@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nomadsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170978 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-14 03:19 EST ------- Fixed package: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/nomadsync.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/nomadsync-0.4.2-5.src.rpm Turns out there was no compiler issue, it was the unicodification of wxGTK 2.6 that was the culprit, so this requires 2.4.x. I saw that package was pulled from Extras anyway... Will need some compat package in devel I guess? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 08:40:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 03:40:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174504] Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140840.k0E8ehfR001425@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wine-docs - Documentation for wine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174504 andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-14 03:40 EST ------- Thanks again :) build for fc5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nman64 at n-man.com Sat Jan 14 08:47:08 2006 From: nman64 at n-man.com (Patrick Barnes) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:47:08 -0600 Subject: GPG key really needed? In-Reply-To: <1137212820.13376.31.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> <1137212820.13376.31.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <43C8BA8C.8090509@n-man.com> Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 21:53 -0600, Patrick Barnes wrote: > > Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Ok, so I'm trying to figure out what good uploading a GPG key into the > > > accounts system is. Here's how I see it: > > > > > > 1. The only thing it's used for is potentially signing the CLA. I say > > > potentially because both > > > > > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/RequestCLA > > > > > > and > > > > > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem > > > > > > say "You can sign the CLA". If it's required, we should change it to > > > "must sign the CLA". > > > > > They read "can" and not "must" due to the option of using a written > > signature and postal courier. CLAs may also not be necessary in all cases. > > Could we change them to say "If you submit the CLA via email, you must > sign it with your GPG key" or something similar then? > I'll add such a correction to my to-do list. Good suggestion. :-) > > > So... is it really needed? Or maybe a better question is can we make > > > it more useful somehow? > > > > > Part of it is availability. It is likely that more use of GPG keys will > > be made in the future. It is also important that when the time comes > > that your GPG key is needed, we can verify that it is the same key as > > you have provided to the account system. It is also possible to verify > > But in the meantime, folks that don't use GPG keys for any other reason > are probably forgetting passwords for them, deleting them on accident, > etc. In the future is fine, but could you elaborate on what the future > use may be? > Use your imagination. ;-) An important principle in the use of GPG keys is reputation. People need to handle their keys and passcodes responsibly, so that they can consistently use the same keys and establish a reputation behind those keys. The use of keys in the Account System is an important part of establishing that reputation with the Fedora Project. > > the GPG key ID for any particular user in the Account System, which the > > paranoid or thorough are free to do. Anyone can check what GPG key ID > > another user has registered in the Account System, but you are correct > > in that there is no single list. You must specify the single account > > Such a list wouldn't be hard to generate though, would it? > I'm sure it would be relatively simple to add this capability to the Account System. Without an immediate need, it is hard to put pressure on someone to make it happen, though. The Infrastructure team is expecting a little better access to the Account System code, at which point someone might start hacking in some additional new features. > > you wish to check. Really, all contributions that are provided through > > an insecure means *should* be GPG-signed, though this is not enforced. > > Can you elaborate on what contributions you're talking about? Email, > maybe. Though I doubt signing everything is all that important. > Anything else you're thinking of? > Any contribution sent by any insecure means. This could include, but is not limited to, packages, patches, documents/presentations, or scripts sent through email, posted on the wiki, published to other websites, etc. Any method which does not allow verification of the origin should be supported with GPG signatures. This isn't even a documented practice, but it probably should be. > josh > > -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64 at n-man.com http://www.n-man.com/ -- Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From jpmahowald at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 08:50:33 2006 From: jpmahowald at gmail.com (John Mahowald) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:50:33 -1200 Subject: yumex kills my router! In-Reply-To: <1136951132.4445.4.camel@tuxhugger> References: <43C39C2F.10808@email.it> <3ea997540601101334i12eafe7dlfd4341818d295180@mail.gmail.com> <1136951132.4445.4.camel@tuxhugger> Message-ID: <3ea997540601140050u3ccf33eej924cc09f50ddbcd4@mail.gmail.com> On 1/10/06, Peter Gordon wrote: > Erm. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but YumEx *is* part of > Fedora Extras... > True. However, as noted in the list description, this is for developers and maintainers of Extras packages. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list Really this could be called fedora-extras-devel-list. fedora-list or fedoraforum.org is user oriented. John From dwmw2 at infradead.org Sat Jan 14 09:16:51 2006 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:16:51 +0000 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 16:27 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > I'm still wondering why the feedback was so rare on this experiment with > fedora-kmodhelper. Was it to scary? I know it looks a bit unusual in the > first moment, but I think this solution (with a bit polishing) is the > best we found so far. > > Panu, dwmw2, Jeremey, skvidal, mschwendt, Anvil, warren, everybody else > interested: What do you think about it? Looks sane enough to me in general. As I said of my similar solution -- it ain't pretty. But it works. I'd like to get rid of 'knownvariants' in the helper script, and it would be nice to be able to have the description match the 'primary' package description. (And it doesn't actually build here -- lirc_it87.c attempts to include asm/segment.h, probably without good reason.) -- dwmw2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 09:52:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 04:52:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176288] Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601140952.k0E9q5Fj010005@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176288 kevin.kofler at chello.at changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kevin.kofler at chello.at ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-14 04:51 EST ------- Dennis: Are you sure your issue with JuK is not due to some C++ library needing a rebuild for a newer g++? This: http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118727 and the fact you're running Rawhide makes me think of this as a possible explanation, though in principle 4.0.x and 4.1.x all ought to be compatible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Jan 14 10:07:39 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:07:39 +0100 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43C8CD6B.9030308@hhs.nl> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/13/06, Steven Pritchard wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: >>> Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by >>> e-mail address. >> Nice. While we're sharing, > > Wouldn't useful scripts like this be best archived in the Extras area > of the Wiki? > > -jef > +1 (and now I don't have anything else usefull to say) Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 12:27:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:27:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141227.k0ECRBS0025946@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-14 07:27 EST ------- May someone take a look at this package, please? This dependency is blocking gajim update. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 12:33:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:33:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141233.k0ECXiFi026820@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 07:33 EST ------- I'll give it a spin, changing to FE-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 Sat Jan 14 12:53:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:53:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141253.k0ECrGYx029898@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 07:53 EST ------- Licence: Can't comment on but if thats the licence they specify then who are we to complain? Looking at http://www.zlib.net/zlib_license.html its more then free enough :-) Package name: normally you would follow the upstream naming, but given that the Core package is called python-sqlite calling it python-sqlite2 is the proper thing to do to avoid confusion Personally i'd make the identation of the Requires: line the same as of the other header fields, but thats my perfectionistic nature :-) Shouldn't sqlite-devel >= 3.0.0 be in the build requires for clarity? - rpmlint output: W: python-sqlite2 invalid-license zlib/libpng As discussed above, i think its safe to ignore, we don't get to choose the licence, authors do that - Package follows naming guidelines - Specfile is in %{name} format - Follows PackagingGuidelines - Licence is Opensource - License field in the package spec file matches the actual license - Incluses licence from source tarbal - In american english - And legible - md5sum matches with upstream download, and specfile url + d/l entry is valid - Build successfully on atleast i386 (tested) into binary rpm - Buildrequires is valid, but misses sqlite-devel (>= 3.0.0) entry! Above makes build in mock build fail with: In file included from src/module.c:24: src/connection.h:32:21: error: sqlite3.h: No such file or directory ... etc etc ... - Has no .so or locales so no macro's needed for it - Owns directories it created - No duplicate files - Has proper %clean section - Uses macro's consitently (as far as aplicable, pythoning is not done thru %configure, etc) - Contains permisable code - %doc doesn't contain package critical files to operate - No header files or static / .so libs or pkgfiles - No gui so no need for .desktop files Please correct the buildrequires error so i can verify it builds cleanly in mock, once thats working i think we are done -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 14 12:58:03 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 13:58:03 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 09:16 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 16:27 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > I'm still wondering why the feedback was so rare on this experiment with > > fedora-kmodhelper. Was it to scary? I know it looks a bit unusual in the > > first moment, but I think this solution (with a bit polishing) is the > > best we found so far. > > > > Panu, dwmw2, Jeremey, skvidal, mschwendt, Anvil, warren, everybody else > > interested: What do you think about it? > > Looks sane enough to me in general. As I said of my similar solution -- > it ain't pretty. But it works. thx > I'd like to get rid of 'knownvariants' in the helper script, Why? We did something like this in the spec file itself before. This solution IMHO is cleaner. Yes, it is not necessary for the buildsys, but it's important for people that plan to rebuild the srpm at home for their current kernel without giving any of the "--define foo bar" parameters. > and it > would be nice to be able to have the description match the 'primary' > package description. Yeah, that might be a good idea. I'll look into this. > (And it doesn't actually build here -- lirc_it87.c attempts to include > asm/segment.h, probably without good reason.) Did build fine here (FC4 kernel from updates-testing). -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 14:02:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:02:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141402.k0EE2oSs005450@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-14 09:02 EST ------- I repair (Comment #13-#15) bugs (exception rpmlint warning: 'W: gnome-yum no-dependency-on usermode-consoleonly') and create a new package: Spec Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum-0.1.2-6.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 stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 14:10:19 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:10:19 -0500 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:32 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/13/06, Steven Pritchard wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > > > e-mail address. > > > > Nice. While we're sharing, > > Wouldn't useful scripts like this be best archived in the Extras area > of the Wiki? Done: http://fedorproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 14:13:00 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:13:00 +0100 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Actually that should probably be: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts the www. version doesn't resolve for me On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 09:10 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:32 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On 1/13/06, Steven Pritchard wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > > > > e-mail address. > > > > > > Nice. While we're sharing, > > > > Wouldn't useful scripts like this be best archived in the Extras area > > of the Wiki? > > Done: > > http://fedorproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 14:24:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:24:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141424.k0EEOYPk007690@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 09:24 EST ------- Few last comments before i can do a complete formal review checklist: - Its not Buildrequires but: BuildRequires: (notice the capital R) - %changelog doesn't have to include the upstream (source) changes, but the changes you made to the package, ie: * Sat Jan 14 2006 Andr?s T?th - 0.1.2-6 - Fixed desktop file vendor - Owned complete datadir - Changed clean section to be fedora compliant - find_lang can use %{name} macro, doesn't need to hard-code 'gnome-yum' And so on .. Your expected to add such a changelog entry for every 'release' of the package you make (ie up the version or release field) describing what you changed in the specfile. Its not required to list what changed in 'gnome-yum' its self,only what you changed of the package / specfile - attr for gyum-query.sh doesn't have to go thru a defattr, you could just do: %attr(0755,root,root) %{_datadir}/gnome-yum/gyum-query.sh - desktop file install misses: --add-category X-Fedora - Missing BuildRequires entry: libgnomeui-devel Thats it i think, great progress so far! Once these final issues are resolved i'll give it the final formal run thru -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 14:29:54 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:29:54 +0100 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137248994.1931.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Woops *looks puzzled* when i clicked the link it went to www... but i (only) now notice the link you provided has no www ... my bad, though i blame evolution or firefox .. or lack of coffee Ignore my previous email please :-) On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:13 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Actually that should probably be: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > the www. version doesn't resolve for me > > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 09:10 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:32 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On 1/13/06, Steven Pritchard wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > > > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > > > > > e-mail address. > > > > > > > > Nice. While we're sharing, > > > > > > Wouldn't useful scripts like this be best archived in the Extras area > > > of the Wiki? > > > > Done: > > > > http://fedorproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 14:32:47 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:32:47 -0500 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137249167.8042.7.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:13 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Actually that should probably be: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > the www. version doesn't resolve for me hmm www.fedoraproject.org works for me. -sv From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 14:31:52 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:31:52 +0100 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1137249167.8042.7.camel@cutter> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137249167.8042.7.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1137249112.30150.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Actually in the original mail from Paul it reads: http://fedorproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts Which is missing an 'A' in Fedor(+a), unless fedorproject is a spinoff from fedorA ? :-) On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 09:32 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:13 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > Actually that should probably be: > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > > > the www. version doesn't resolve for me > > hmm www.fedoraproject.org works for me. > > -sv > > -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 14:37:05 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:37:05 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair Message-ID: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, some of you might have heard of it already, but I think I probably should announce it here: The Fedora Extras Steering Committee has elected a new chair (sometimes also known as "Fearless Leader") last Thursday in the FESCo-meeting. Greg DeKoenigsberg stepped down from this position to have more free time for other Fedora-related tasks in the future. I was elected to do the job from now on. Short Biography: In my real-life I'm 28 Years old and live together with my girlfriend in a small House with garden in Hannover (Germany). We own two cats (Linus [ ;-) ] and Lucy) and have no children. My virtual Fedora-Life started with packaging alsa for fedora.us in fall/winter 2003 iirc. Shortly after that I also began packaging stuff for a well known 3rd party repo that spun-off the old fedora.us and is compatible with fedora.us/Fedora Extras. I maintain 17 packages in Fedora Extras (According to owners.list). I joined FESCo last Summer at FUDCon II on LinuxTag. Why was I selected for this job: Seems my recent work on the kernel-module stuff was one of the reasons. The other probably was that I'm *not* on the payroll of Red Hat. My plans for the future of Fedora Extras: Good question. I have some in my mind, but nothing earth shaking; keep watching http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule and the lists for details. The real question here is: What do you think that I (or FESCo/Fedora Extras in general) *should* do (better) in the future? Are there any areas where you think "Fedora Extras needs to improve here", "this works a lot better in Distribution X than in Fedora Extras". I would be glad to get input from you all. Send them either directly to me (preferred) or to the list (If you think that a discussion on the topic is overdue). Thanks in advance. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 14:35:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:35:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141435.k0EEZ1Tq008969@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 09:34 EST ------- Last 2 small comments: - No ; needed after the done (in the for doc ... loop), also no ; needed after the rm -f line - Could you please add: %dir %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnome-yum before the: %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnome-yum line? Thats all i could find :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 14:46:53 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the %{url} of the package Preferably with some intergrated wiki (like?) functionality where people can describe more about the package, provide feedback, and usefull hints Think freshrpm's meets repo's meets wiki. Would make for more of a visible 'helpfull community' envirioment then just mailing lists (which for many "Users" are a scary and unknown place) i think Other thing i'd love to see is a good extra's intergration in Fedora, no nice interface for it yet or intergration in the installation process, but thats already WIP (work in progress) i think -- Chris On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:37 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi, > > some of you might have heard of it already, but I think I probably > should announce it here: > > The Fedora Extras Steering Committee has elected a new chair (sometimes > also known as "Fearless Leader") last Thursday in the FESCo-meeting. > Greg DeKoenigsberg stepped down from this position to have more free > time for other Fedora-related tasks in the future. I was elected to do > the job from now on. > > Short Biography: In my real-life I'm 28 Years old and live together with > my girlfriend in a small House with garden in Hannover (Germany). We own > two cats (Linus [ ;-) ] and Lucy) and have no children. My virtual > Fedora-Life started with packaging alsa for fedora.us in fall/winter > 2003 iirc. Shortly after that I also began packaging stuff for a well > known 3rd party repo that spun-off the old fedora.us and is compatible > with fedora.us/Fedora Extras. I maintain 17 packages in Fedora Extras > (According to owners.list). I joined FESCo last Summer at FUDCon II on > LinuxTag. > > Why was I selected for this job: Seems my recent work on the > kernel-module stuff was one of the reasons. The other probably was that > I'm *not* on the payroll of Red Hat. > > My plans for the future of Fedora Extras: Good question. I have some in > my mind, but nothing earth shaking; keep watching > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule and the lists for > details. > > The real question here is: What do you think that I (or FESCo/Fedora > Extras in general) *should* do (better) in the future? Are there any > areas where you think "Fedora Extras needs to improve here", "this works > a lot better in Distribution X than in Fedora Extras". I would be glad > to get input from you all. Send them either directly to me (preferred) > or to the list (If you think that a discussion on the topic is overdue). > Thanks in advance. > > CU > thl -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 15:11:04 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:11:04 -0500 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:46 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services > is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a > click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links > for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the > %{url} of the package you mean like this: http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/ While it doesn't have the ability to annotate them I'm not sure how good of an idea annotating the packages is anyway. I'd be afraid of having to monitor all the spam and crap there. > Preferably with some intergrated wiki (like?) functionality where people > can describe more about the package, provide feedback, and usefull hints feedback should go in bugzilla. useful hints might be valuable but again - weighed against the spam? -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 15:07:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:07:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141507.k0EF7Q4s012813@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-14 10:07 EST ------- The problem is that there is quite a bit more that should be reviewed, beside just rpmlint errors & whether it builds correctly in mock. There is nothing in your comments showing that you check any of the items listed in the PackageReview list from the wiki. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines#head-05a78c7ca440544397657679f87fbdbd84d9be28 For an example of what some other people's reviews look like, refer to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166351#c1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165952#c8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166092#c2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166409#c6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 15:21:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:21:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175237] Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141521.k0EFL4lq014004@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175237 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-14 10:20 EST ------- Good: - MUST: rpmlint output: E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/store/weave.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/revfile.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/selftest/test_weave.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/xml4.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/xml5.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/upgrade.py 0644 E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/xml.py 0644E: bzr non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/weave.py 0644 which I think can be ignored - MUST: The package is named according to the PackageNamingGuidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec - MUST: The package meets the PackagingGuidelines. - MUST: Bzr has a GPL license. - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - MUST: The source package does not have a copy of the license, so it isn't in %doc - MUST: The spec file is written in American English. - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible. - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds on i386/devel. - MUST: A package must not contain any BuildRequires that are listed in the exceptions section of PackagingGuidelines. - MUST: All other Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. - MUST: The package does not contain shared libraries. - MUST: The package is not designed to be relocatable. - MUST: The package owns all of the directories that it cretes. - MUST: Package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. %files section includes a %defattr(...) line. - MUST: Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of PackagingGuidelines. - MUST: The package contains code. - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -docs subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity) - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. - MUST: Header files or static libraries must be in a -devel package. - MUST: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package. - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. - MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. - MUST: Package does not include a GUI app. - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. - SHOULD: Builds in mock on devel/i386, devel/x86_64, FC4/x86_64 - SHOULD: No scriptlets are used. - SHOULD: There are no subpackages. Would be nice: - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. Bad: - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. Every command results in the following error: [jeff at max1 ~]$ bzr help init bzr: ERROR: No module named configobj.configobj command: '/usr/bin/bzr' 'help' 'init' pwd: u'/home/jeff' error: exceptions.ImportError at /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/config.py line 62, in ?() see ~/.bzr.log for debug information NEEDSWORK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 15:23:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:23:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141523.k0EFNGnK014371@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-14 10:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > Personally i'd make the identation of the Requires: line the same as of the > other header fields, but thats my perfectionistic nature :-) I also put spaces in my other spec files but this one is exception -- I wanted to make this line fit in 80 characters wide terminal. > Shouldn't sqlite-devel >= 3.0.0 be in the build requires for clarity? Aghh, I checked dependencies with fedora-rmdevelrpms script but I must have forgotten about adding BR to the spec file. I put only ?BuildRequires: sqlite-devel? because on FC3+ sqlite package is in version 3.1.2. > Please correct the buildrequires error so i can verify it builds cleanly in > mock, once thats working i think we are done Done. http://pmail.pl/~raven/python-sqlite2.spec http://pmail.pl/~raven/python-sqlite2-2.0.5-2.src.rpm (sorry that it took me so long -- I had problems with finding webserver) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 15:45:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:45:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141545.k0EFjXIf017769@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-14 10:45 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum-0.1.2-7.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 Jan 14 16:24:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:24:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141624.k0EGOi2P021956@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-14 11:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > * go ahead and make the math portion a different package Apparently it's not possible to use a single SPEC file to build a noarch package and a platform-specific in a single run, so the main package which is actually noarch will become platform-specific. Anyway, I did it for the sake of the exercise: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki-1.5.5-2.src.rpm > * I noticed mediawiki-install.txt is included as a source but is not included in > the RPM after it gets built, perhaps that should go under %docs? It already goes in the %docs. It gets named "INSTALL.fedora" in the final RPM. > W: mediawiki unstripped-binary-or-object /var/www/mediawiki/math/texvc That is weird. rpmlint doesn't give me any such warning on my own machines, and a proper *-debuginfo RPM is also created. Would you please attach a build log? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 16:27:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:27:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176288] Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141627.k0EGRfJO022235@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdemulimedia-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176288 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-14 11:27 EST ------- its very possible that its something that needs rebuilding in extras. ill do some tests today rebuilding things from 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 Sat Jan 14 16:59:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:59:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141659.k0EGxtVg026303@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 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 2006-01-14 11:59 EST ------- As requested a review, first look over the specfile while doing a build yields: -Summary must not start with "A ..." remove "A .." -Summary line exceeds 80 chars (nitpick) -Is the requires openssl nescesarry? "ldd /usr/lib64/libtorrent.so" gives: libcrypto.so.6 => /lib64/libcrypto.so.6 (0x00002aaaaac68000) libsigc-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libsigc-2.0.so.0 (0x00002aaaaaea8000) libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002aaaaafae000) libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002aaaab1ab000) libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002aaaab32d000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002aaaab566000) libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00002aaaab674000) libz.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00002aaaab778000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x0000555555554000) and "rpm -qf /lib64/libcrypto.so.6" gives: openssl-0.9.8a-5.x86_64 so openssl is already automaticly required, or does it require additonal non .so files provided by openssl? -%package devel, Summary s/envirioment/environment/ -%package devel, Group should be Development/Libraries . -%package devel, Description Header, include files seems a bit double to me. -%files %dir %{_includedir}/torrent %{_includedir}/torrent/*.h can be replaced by just (nitpick again) %{_includedir}/torrent rpm will then own that dir and pickup all files under it automaticly It compiles without an warnings on 64bit, good! rpmlint also likes it. Please fix the above and I'll do a full review 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 Jan 14 17:08:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:08:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141708.k0EH8hf3027052@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-14 12:08 EST ------- Luya, first of all I want to thank you for your work, but I'm having some problems with your reviews too. I joined FE just a short time before you so I think I still have a lot to learn. More detailed reviews would be helpful. This also has been mentioned on fedora-extras-list, see https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-December/msg01147.html One package had a md5sum mismatch, that I didn't notice, the tarball had silently been changed upstream (bug #173543). I downloaded all sources again and compared the sums so I'm sure they should match now, nevertheless I'd feel more comfortable if I knew somebody else checked the md5sums too. If anybody else would like to review (some of) my packages, he's highly welcome. ATM there are the following packages still to be reviewed: bug #173549 xfce4-mount-plugin bug #173552 xfce4-sensors-plugin bug #173553 xfce4-websearch-plugin bug #173653 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin bug #173660 xfce4-diskperf-plugin and perhaps bug #173550 xfce4-netload-plugin bug #173661 xfce4-fsguard-plugin which have been reviewed by Luya but lack some detailed information. Thx everybody. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 17:23:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:23:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141723.k0EHNYar028663@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 12:23 EST ------- * Sat Jan 14 2006 - Chris Chabot - 0.8.2-2 - Improved general summary & devel package description - Simplified devel package includedir files section - Removed openssl as requires, its implied by .so dependency - Correct devel package Group New URLS: SPEC: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/libtorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/libtorrent-0.8.2-2.src.rpm Thanks for the time & review so far! ps you forgot to set the bug to blocking FE-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 Sat Jan 14 17:34:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:34:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141734.k0EHY8Hk029837@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 12:33 EST ------- Nock builds cleanly and BuildRequires is peachy perfect. Thanks for solving those last issues All the other items from last review list still apply the same (all correct). FE-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 Sat Jan 14 17:45:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:45:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141745.k0EHjAAs031835@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 gajownik at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |gajownik at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-14 12:44 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > I have added kdebase-devel to BR. I'll think about > ?--disable-dependency-tracking --enable-final?, thanks for info. I found some more info about these options ? http://www.kadu.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6607 (in Polish ;] ) http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=99197154828408&w=2 These options are useful for packagers but not for the developers so it would be nice to turn them on :D Things that need some work: - *.desktop file does not have ?MimeType? tag so you don't have to run `update-desktop-database' https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177588#c3 (please don't forget to remove unneeded Requires) - you may want to change ?/etc/profile.d/qt.sh? to ?%{_sysconfdir}/profile.d/qt.sh? - broken libtool archive: [y4kk0 at X i386]$ rpmlint smb4k-0.6.5-2.i386.rpm E: smb4k invalid-directory-reference /usr/lib/kde3/konqsidebar_smb4k.la W: smb4k dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/smb4k/common ../common [y4kk0 at X i386]$ For example on my machine ?dependency_libs? variable from that file contains "-L/home/y4kk0/rpmbuild/BUILD/smb4k-0.6.5/smb4k/core -L/home/y4kk0/rpmbuild/BUILD/smb4k-0.6.5/smb4k/widgets". I'll try to investigate it further. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 17:52:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:52:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141752.k0EHq1PT032688@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 12:51 EST ------- Thanks that solves all the issues reported However it looks like you modified the source.tar.bz2 file? MD5SUM now missmatches md5sum: 43e4f678a9243c92297f0929e7d87efe (original from sf.net) gnome-yum-0.1.2.tar.bz2 bc105a3711409e8bdd66522caa59b316 (from src.rpm) gnome-yum-0.1.2.tar.bz2 I presume you've done this to include the X-Fedora category? Might be easier to use the original source and in your spec file do: desktop-file-install --vendor fedora --delete-original \ --dir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications \ --add-category X-Fedora \ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications/gnome-yum.desktop It is a strict policy for Fedora Extra's that source tarbal must match the original one (checked with md5sum) so unfortunatly i can't accept this package yet. Please either update the upstream tarbal, or use the original one and add the --add-category X-Fedora to the desktop-file-install Other then that its looking great, and builds cleanly in mock too. I will give it the formal review once the source tarbal issue is resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sat Jan 14 17:56:09 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:26:09 +0330 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures Message-ID: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> >From what I have learned searching the web, it seems that using a single spec file to build one noarch subpackage and another arch-specific one in a single is impossible. Is that right, or I was misled? Assuming I was right in deducing so, I have questions regarding the packaging of MediaWiki. The package is mostly straight-forward PHP, but also includes a certain feature for handling mathematical formulas (that is turned off in the default configuration). That feature is implemented as a binary, and has dependencies on LaTeX, dvips, and ImageMagick, which have large dependencies themselves. I tried packaging the formula support as a subpackage, but I can't make the main package noarch and the -math subpackage arch-dependent. I have three choices: 1) Get along with an arch-independent RPM package marked as arch-dependent. 2) Forget subpackages and make them one RPM with unified dependencies. 3) Make these two different SPEC files. (This would create a burden on me for maintaining the two in sync, so I guess I should only do this if the other two options are unacceptable.) What do you think I should do? Or am I missing a fourth and better path? roozbeh From jeff.pitman at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 18:25:51 2006 From: jeff.pitman at gmail.com (Jeff Pitman) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:25:51 -0800 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures In-Reply-To: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <6b9c17630601141025j52b21163rc63e60934eb29c5d@mail.gmail.com> On 1/14/06, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > >From what I have learned searching the web, it seems that using a single > spec file to build one noarch subpackage and another arch-specific one > in a single is impossible. Is that right, or I was misled? Assuming I > was right in deducing so, I have questions regarding the packaging of > MediaWiki. You are correct, you cannot have sub-packages as different archs within the same context and have a one pass rpmbuild generate them. You can hack a .spec to have multiple archs via %ifarch; however, this requires multiple passes of rpmbuild to get all packages built. For example, kernel does this for documentation. > > The package is mostly straight-forward PHP, but also includes a certain > feature for handling mathematical formulas (that is turned off in the > default configuration). That feature is implemented as a binary, and has > dependencies on LaTeX, dvips, and ImageMagick, which have large > dependencies themselves. > > I tried packaging the formula support as a subpackage, but I can't > make the main package noarch and the -math subpackage arch-dependent. I > have three choices: > > 1) Get along with an arch-independent RPM package marked as > arch-dependent. > > 2) Forget subpackages and make them one RPM with unified dependencies. You could pick this if: 1) it doesn't take much space, and 2) most user's will use the component anyway. > 3) Make these two different SPEC files. (This would create a burden on > me for maintaining the two in sync, so I guess I should only do this if > the other two options are unacceptable.) > > What do you think I should do? Or am I missing a fourth and better path? The fourth would be to consider a two pass scenario. I'm not willing to say it's better though. -- -jeff From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 18:38:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 13:38:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141838.k0EIcICh005379@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-14 13:38 EST ------- The formal review steps: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - Proper use of ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - Proper -devel package - No .la files - Package owns directories properly Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets, or scriplets at all - No unnescesarry requires Looks good to me, changing blockerbug to FE-ACCEPT and assigning 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 admin at ramshacklestudios.com Sat Jan 14 18:56:23 2006 From: admin at ramshacklestudios.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:56:23 -0800 Subject: yumex kills my router! In-Reply-To: <3ea997540601140050u3ccf33eej924cc09f50ddbcd4@mail.gmail.com> References: <43C39C2F.10808@email.it> <3ea997540601101334i12eafe7dlfd4341818d295180@mail.gmail.com> <1136951132.4445.4.camel@tuxhugger> <3ea997540601140050u3ccf33eej924cc09f50ddbcd4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137264983.9959.17.camel@tuxhugger> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 20:50 -1200, John Mahowald wrote: > On 1/10/06, Peter Gordon wrote: > > > Erm. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but YumEx *is* part of > > Fedora Extras... > > > > True. However, as noted in the list description, this is for > developers and maintainers of Extras packages. > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > > Really this could be called fedora-extras-devel-list. > > fedora-list or fedoraforum.org is user oriented. I see. Thanks for explaining that. =) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7 -------------- 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 Sat Jan 14 19:00:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:00:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176653] Review Request: python-sqlite2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141900.k0EJ0tgS008119@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sqlite2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176653 gajownik at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-14 14:00 EST ------- Thanks for the review! Package was built correctly in fedora-development-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 Sat Jan 14 19:05:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:05:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141905.k0EJ5DSm008508@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-14 14:05 EST ------- My bad. I will be carefull 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 stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 19:09:21 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:09:21 -0500 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <1137249112.30150.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> <604aa7910601131732l13a21babkc837f701b1931719@mail.gmail.com> <1137247819.333.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137247980.1931.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137249167.8042.7.camel@cutter> <1137249112.30150.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137265762.333.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:31 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 09:32 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:13 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > > Actually that should probably be: > > > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > > > > > the www. version doesn't resolve for me > > > > hmm www.fedoraproject.org works for me. > > > Actually in the original mail from Paul it reads: > > http://fedorproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts > > Which is missing an 'A' in Fedor(+a), unless fedorproject is a spinoff > from fedorA ? :-) OK, we can stop this thread now, the typist in question has been sacked. ;-) -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 19:10:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:10:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141910.k0EJA5mp009034@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-14 14:09 EST ------- I need modify the next files in the source package: ./configure.in and ./configure => remove gtkhtml2-devel checking src/callbacks.c => remove one line: #include ./README,./TODO => to be not empty ./gnome-yum.spec => fix format bugs ./desktop.in => Add fedora category If it is necessary I make a new release (v0.1.3). It is OK? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 19:18:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:18:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141918.k0EJIOuA009989@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 14:18 EST ------- Making a 1.3.0 release would be preferable then yes Or alternativly you could make a patch file and include it in the spec/rpm that makes the changes you mentioned, but since your able to change this upstream, making a new release would be easier yes :-) As soon as you have that ready and with a new .spec / .src.rpm i'll give it the formal review. Thanks for the effort 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 Sat Jan 14 19:25:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:25:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177635] Review Request: libtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141925.k0EJPrYx010883@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 14:25 EST ------- Commited, added entry to owners list and build cleanly on FC5 extra's in the buildsystem, closing bug. Thanks for the 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 Sat Jan 14 19:26:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:26:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601141926.k0EJQAgb010947@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 Bug 177636 depends on bug 177635, which changed state. Bug 177635 Summary: Review Request: libtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177635 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 ed at eh3.com Sat Jan 14 19:47:18 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:47:18 -0500 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures In-Reply-To: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137268038.18432.184.camel@ernie> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 21:26 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > I tried packaging the formula support as a subpackage, but I can't > make the main package noarch and the -math subpackage arch-dependent. I > have three choices: > > 1) Get along with an arch-independent RPM package marked as > arch-dependent. > > 2) Forget subpackages and make them one RPM with unified dependencies. > > 3) Make these two different SPEC files. (This would create a burden on > me for maintaining the two in sync, so I guess I should only do this if > the other two options are unacceptable.) > > What do you think I should do? Or am I missing a fourth and better path? Hi Roozbeh, The #3 option was chosen for the moin and moin-latex packages, which have only vaguely similar circumstances (they're actually both noarch). While it does take a little more effort, #3 probably isn't so difficult to maintain. And by splitting into noarch and arch-specific you can let users choose whether they want the math support and its additional dependencies or not. But, ultimately, its your choice if you're packaging it. :-) 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 Jan 14 20:03:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142003.k0EK3Yvx014612@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-14 15:03 EST ------- Things which need to be changed: -Summary must not start with "A ..." remove "A .." -.so Requires are picked up by rpm automaticly, remove explicit requires -rtorrent.rc.example should be installed with 644 not 664 Possible improvements: -I would change "A client frontend to libtorrent" to "BitTorrent client using libtorrent" Formal Review: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - Proper use of ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets, or scriplets at all - No unnescesarry requires Looks good to me, changing blockerbug to FE-ACCEPT assuming that you will fix all items listed under "Things which need to be changed". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From steve at silug.org Sat Jan 14 20:14:23 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:14:23 -0600 Subject: rpms/perl-Module-Build/FC-4 .cvsignore, 1.7, 1.8 perl-Module-Build.spec, 1.11, 1.12 sources, 1.7, 1.8 In-Reply-To: <1136928770.28269.29.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <200601102114.k0ALEsL8031766@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1136928770.28269.29.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060114201423.GA3039@osiris.silug.org> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 09:32:50PM +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote: > > %changelog > > +* Mon Sep 05 2005 Steven Pritchard - 0.2611-2 > > +- Minor spec cleanup. > > +- Add COPYING and Artistic. > > You know the guidelines were changed and it's no longer required to > include the license text if upstream don't include it, right? You'll note I actually made that change some time back in the devel branch. I didn't bother reverting it when syncing devel with FC-3/FC-4. 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 Jan 14 20:21:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:21:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142021.k0EKLhWm016206@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-14 15:21 EST ------- Is %{_datadir}/nagios/html/docs required or could it be marked %doc? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 20:32:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:32:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142032.k0EKWW3N017197@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-14 15:32 EST ------- The HTML Doc's are used by the webinterface. There's a "Documentation" in the nav. frame that uses it. I could move it to /usr/share/doc/nagios-1.2/ but I'd have to create an alias in the apache conf. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 20:33:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:33:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142033.k0EKXf8a017319@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 15:33 EST ------- * Sat Jan 14 2006 - Chris Chabot - 0.4.2-2 - Improved summary & description - Removed explicit requires, leaving to rpm - Changed mode of rtorrent.rc.example to 644 New urls: SPEC: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/rtorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.xs4all.nl/~chabotc/rtorrent-0.4.2-2.src.rpm 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 Jan 14 20:35:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:35:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170978] Review Request: nomadsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142035.k0EKZfok017520@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nomadsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170978 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-14 15:35 EST ------- I figure I will replace wxGTK-devel for compat-wxGTK or compat-wxGTK2 in the devel (FC5) version. Do you want me to provide a separate spec for 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 Sat Jan 14 20:39:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:39:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142039.k0EKdWZu017923@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-14 15:39 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gnome-yum.sourceforge.net/download/gnome-yum-0.1.3-1.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 Sat Jan 14 20:44:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:44:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177818] New: Review Request: adplug 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=177818 Summary: Review Request: adplug Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: triad at df.lth.se QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com 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-1.5.1-2.20060101cvs.src.rpm Description: AdPlug is a free software, cross-platform, hardware independent AdLib sound player library, mainly written in C++ and released under the LGPL. AdPlug plays sound data, originally created for the AdLib (OPL2) audio board, directly from its original format on top of an OPL2 emulator or by using the real hardware. No OPL chip is required for playback. It supports various audio formats from MS-DOS AdLib trackers. This is a CVS checkout, because only the CVS version supports the changes in the version of libbinio (by the same author) stored in Fedora Extras. Since we (FE) initiated these changes in libbinio, we should eat our own dogfood :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 20:52:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:52:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142052.k0EKqZH9019077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-14 15:52 EST ------- Really changing to FE-ACCEPT (forgot that last time). Approved, but please look over the description again the sentences aren't fluid. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 14 20:57:49 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 22:57:49 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137272269.22283.1.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 13:58 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 09:16 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > > (And it doesn't actually build here -- lirc_it87.c attempts to include > > asm/segment.h, probably without good reason.) > > Did build fine here (FC4 kernel from updates-testing). That's probably a PPC thing. And it's not only the it87 driver, but lirc_serial.c and lirc_sir.c try to include it too. Reported upstream. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 21:06:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:06:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142106.k0EL6hYL020417@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-14 16:06 EST ------- It doesn't necessarily have to be moved; it is possible to mark files and dirs as %doc even though they're outside of the normal path for docs. The tricky part would be splitting the %files entry. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 14 21:17:16 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:17:16 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137273436.22283.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 13:58 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 09:16 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > > I'd like to get rid of 'knownvariants' in the helper script, > > Why? We did something like this in the spec file itself before. I'd like to get rid of that from both the specfile _and_ the script. But if we want to support "--define"less rebuilds for arbitrary custom (but compatible) currently running kernels, AFAICS that would require us to be able to extract the variant off a random "uname -r" string, which I don't think is possible. > This solution IMHO is cleaner. Agreed, it's an improvement, but: > it's important for people that plan to rebuild the srpm at home for > their current kernel without giving any of the "--define foo bar" > parameters. That works only if their kernel variant is one of the known variants :( From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 21:18:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:18:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142118.k0ELIU30021386@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 16:18 EST ------- Thanks! Changed the description around a littlebit to make it a bit more fluid, that will teach me to use the description from the upstream homepage :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 21:25:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:25:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142125.k0ELPR29022071@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-14 16:25 EST ------- I did not know that :-P How's this: SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-11.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 ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Jan 14 22:00:45 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:00:45 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 16:27 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 13.01.2006, 08:59 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > > I think the part of this experiment that handles variants is definitely > > an improvement, assuming that the build system will be capable of > > passing the correct variants to the builds. Can we assume that? > > I did not talk to dcbw about that yet but will do that soon. Anyway, we > still can hardcode the kvariants if it does not work in the beginning. Ack. > > The other part that shuffles stuff around %prep/%build/%install can > > result in specfile simplifications, > > Agreed. And there is an additional benefit: the debug-packages are a lot > smaller if you build more then one Hm, something missing from that sentence, eg. "variant in the same dir"? Actually, if I understand correctly, that's not a benefit, it's breakage. The debuginfo packages would then contain the symbols and sources primarily for the last variant built in the loop plus possible leftovers from earlier builds, with probably most of the earlier builds' stuff overwritten or removed. Both the contents of the sources and symbols may and do differ between variants, and it's possible for some variants to contain modules and sources not at all present for others (which should be obviously avoided). The lirc package is an example of all this. > If no one complains loudly soon about this fedora-kmodhelper idea in > above srpm then I think I'll work on modifying the last > extras-kmod-proposal to a solution with the fedora-kmodhelper scheme. +1 Here's a couple of updated example packages, converted to use kmodhelper (I suggest /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/kmodtool and %{kmodtool} for it, BTW) and avoiding debuginfo problems. Also added some additional known variants to the script. The code in both packages is in a pretty bad shape regarding the latest Rawhide kernels (most modules disabled in lirc, thinkpad doesn't compile at all), but better on FC4, and anyway good enough for illustration purposes. http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.8.pre4.2.6.15_1.1853_FC5.src.rpm http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-7.2.6.14_1.1656_FC4.src.rpm From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 22:08:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:08:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142208.k0EM8qOV026068@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-14 17:08 EST ------- You're missing the %{_datadir}/%{name}/html directory itself, but yes, just like that. Although you could consolidate all those new entries into %{_datadir}/%{name}/html/[^d]* since docs is the only one that starts with d. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 22:10:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:10:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142210.k0EMAE1g026252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-14 17:10 EST ------- Looks good, the formal review: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires rpmlint's only warning is: W: gnome-yum no-dependency-on usermode-consoleonly Mock builds cleanly for fc-devel Please read: - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/NewPackageProcess and - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors and - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq Carefully for the next steps FE-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 Sat Jan 14 22:15:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:15:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142215.k0EMFQtA026818@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-14 17:15 EST ------- May someone take a look at this package, please? This dependency is blocking ushare (176618). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 22:44:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142244.k0EMiAUW029264@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-14 17:44 EST ------- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-12.src.rpm Expressions are our friends. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 22:51:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:51:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142251.k0EMpH7q029935@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-14 17:51 EST ------- $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/ushare-0.9.5-3.src.rpm $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ushare-0.9.5- ushare-0.9.5-1.i386.rpm ushare-0.9.5-2.i386.rpm ushare-0.9.5-3.i386.rpm [tanguy at bureau ~]$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ushare-0.9.5-3.i386.rpm E: ushare non-standard-uid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-gid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ushare 0770 This seems ok for me. May someone take a look at this package, please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sat Jan 14 22:59:33 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:59:33 +0100 Subject: Buildsys weirdness Message-ID: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> Still sometimes getting weird results on the build systems, here's a package build request (libtorrent for fc3) that failed: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2883-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log Then later i re-asked it to build the exact the same src.rpm, and it succeeds: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2887-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log Kind of odd right? Owell no biggy i don't mind kicking the system to get it working properly again (did a local mock first to make sure it wasn't me though), but maybe the room the servers are in could use a bit better cooling? :-) -- Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 14 23:35:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:35:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171039] Review Request: geos In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142335.k0ENZoWX001196@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-14 18:35 EST ------- Thanks Ralf. I've applied the patch and geos now builds in devel/FC5. I also raised this issue with the upstream developers. This issue can now be closed (I can't change the status) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 14 23:42:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:42:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170978] Review Request: nomadsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601142342.k0ENg3qB001773@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nomadsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170978 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-14 18:41 EST ------- That would be best. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 00:24:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 19:24:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] New: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor 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=177825 Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/torsmo.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/torsmo-0.18-2.src.rpm Description: Torsmo (TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor) is a system monitor that sits in the corner of your desktop. Torsmo can show various information about your system and its peripherals. Torsmo is very light and customizable, and it renders text on the root window. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 01:15:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177827] New: Review Request: python-ctypes - Advanced Foreign Function Interface 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=177827 Summary: Review Request: python-ctypes - Advanced Foreign Function Interface for Python Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: icon at fedoraproject.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca/fe/python-ctypes.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rakta.wsg.mcgill.ca/fe/python-ctypes-0.9.6-1.src.rpm Description: ctypes is an advanced ffi (Foreign Function Interface) package for Python 2.3 and higher. ctypes allows to call functions exposed from dlls/shared libraries and has extensive facilities to create, access and manipulate simple and complicated C data types in Python - in other words: wrap libraries in pure Python. It is even possible to implement C callback functions in pure Python. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 01:23:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:23:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] New: Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy 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=177828 Summary: Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: icon at fedoraproject.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://open.mcgill.ca/~icon/fe/python-libtidy.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://open.mcgill.ca/~icon/fe/python-libtidy-0.2-1.src.rpm Description: A Python wrapper (bindings) for libtidy. (Requires python-ctypes, currently under review as well). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 15 04:15:17 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:15:17 +0200 Subject: Buildsys weirdness In-Reply-To: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> References: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1137298517.9831.10.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 23:59 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Still sometimes getting weird results on the build systems, here's a > package build request (libtorrent for fc3) that failed: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2883-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Then later i re-asked it to build the exact the same src.rpm, and it > succeeds: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2887-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Kind of odd right? Right, but %{?_smp_mflags} can sometimes result in odd stuff. You have it locally set to something, eg. -j3, right? Doing some repetitive rebuilds locally with it set might not be a bad idea. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 05:44:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:44:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] New: Review Request: wmweather+ 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=177832 Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: dcantrel at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/dcantrel/extras/wmweather+.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/dcantrel/extras/wmweather+-2.9-1.src.rpm Description: wmweather+ will download the National Weather Serivce METAR bulletins; AVN, ETA, and MRF forecasts; and any weather map for display in a WindowMaker dockapp. Think wmweather with a smaller font, forecasts, a weather map, and a sky condition display. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 15 06:55:30 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:55:30 +0100 Subject: rpms/celestia/devel celestia.spec,1.10,1.11 In-Reply-To: <200601142216.k0EMGcRp004999@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601142216.k0EMGcRp004999@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137308130.17219.151.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 17:16 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote: > Author: steve > --- celestia.spec 26 Dec 2005 22:50:48 -0000 1.10 > +++ celestia.spec 14 Jan 2006 22:16:05 -0000 1.11 > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > Name: celestia > Version: 1.4.0 > -Release: 1%{?dist} > +Release: 2%{?dist} > > Summary: OpenGL real-time visual space simulation > > @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ > BuildRequires: libjpeg-devel > BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils > BuildRequires: libGL-devel > +BuildRequires: xorg-x11-proto-devel > +BuildRequires: libXt-devel This "BR: xorg-x11-proto-devel" is redundant to "BR: libXt-devel", because libXt-devel requires libX11-devel, which in the end requires xorg-x11-proto-devel. Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 08:28:34 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:28:34 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 10:11 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:46 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services > > is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a > > click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links > > for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the > > %{url} of the package I agree with this. > you mean like this: > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/ This is nice, but this is arch-specific (i386 in this case) and not even links to the src.rpms. As I said before in a thread one or two month ago: I really think we should have a additional interface (for mirrors that don't mirror all archs) that links to all packages (e.g. src.rpm, i386, x86_64, ppc) similar to what freshrpms does. This is in fact quite easy afaics: Run createrepo and repoview in the dir that later is uploaded to http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/ -- this will create a repo (http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/repodata) that probably nobody {will,should} use (because it's quite large), but the individual package-websites in repoview (http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/repodata/repoview) then will link to the src.rpm and the all the binary packages for i386, x86_64, ppc on one page -- sililar to what freshrpms has. This would solve parts of the problem -- there is still no central point of entry from outside with a defined static URL from where you could jump to the packages in the different extras trees for various core releases. But we need something like this: Upstream authors of application foo then simply could place something like this on his website for foo: "Packages for Fedora Core are in Fedora Extras and can be installed by running yum install foo Further informations how to use Fedora Extras, links to src.rpms, binary packages and the current state of foo in Fedora Extras can be found at foo's Fedora Extras Webpage at: http://fedoraproject.org/extras/packages/foo.html (stupid name, anyone any better idea? That page of course needs to link to the repoview files). Long description. I should make it shorter: "In the long term I want a web interface with features similar to that from debian (for an example see http://packages.debian.org/stable/admin/at )" > While it doesn't have the ability to annotate them I'm not sure how good > of an idea annotating the packages is anyway. I'd be afraid of having to > monitor all the spam and crap there. Agreed. > > Preferably with some intergrated wiki (like?) functionality where people > > can describe more about the package, provide feedback, and usefull hints > > feedback should go in bugzilla. useful hints might be valuable but again > - weighed against the spam? The biggest problem IMHO: Pages in the wiki would probably have to created and maintained manually. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From chabotc at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 15 08:56:36 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:56:36 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137315396.1927.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> I agree, in my enthusiasm for this idea i don't have any solutions for the spam or moderation such a thing could require. But think about it, one of the current challenges is to build a energetic community, and while engineering is one part of that community (the role we forfill and love to partake in), there's so many more users out there of fedora (-extra's), and their not so at home at kernel or gnome or fedora mailing lists and project pages and technical information. How do we bind them to a 'fedora' feeling? How do we engage them, interest them, let them become more then a 'user' but become a part of a community where they have been helped, and in turn help others! Pretty shiny interfaces to our repo data and the information we do have is one step in that process, but it doesn't complete the process.. Some kind of meeting ground where the initial seeds of contribution and assistance and that 'community' feeling can grow. We focus a lot on the engineering part, and we do so pretty well (i think), that's something we probably inherited from RedHat, they always have had a knack for great engineering but a little bit less at dressing it up :-) I think if you take a look at others in 'our market', and what newcommers make the biggest splashes (such as umbutu?) then looks, forums, wiki's, friendly usable places for not so hard core engineering type people combined with friendly consistent looks are what drive that enthusiasm, and lead to many other positive things. So while i agree that maybe Wiki pages isn't the best solution for this challenge (i was just shouting some ideas from the top of my head), there is a void to be filled out there i think, something we could improve upon, and Fedora Extra's and its community is a great place for it to start! Anyhow thats just some morning ramblings before my first cup of coffee, maybe after coffee i will feel differently about this, but i don't expect too :-) -- Chris Chabot On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 09:28 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Preferably with some intergrated wiki (like?) functionality where people > > > can describe more about the package, provide feedback, and usefull hints > > > > feedback should go in bugzilla. useful hints might be valuable but again > > - weighed against the spam? > > The biggest problem IMHO: Pages in the wiki would probably have to > created and maintained manually. > -- > Thorsten Leemhuis > -------------- 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 Jan 15 10:07:52 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:07:52 +0100 Subject: Buildsys weirdness In-Reply-To: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> References: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20060115110752.51d0fcb4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:59:33 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Still sometimes getting weird results on the build systems, here's a > package build request (libtorrent for fc3) that failed: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2883-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Then later i re-asked it to build the exact the same src.rpm, and it > succeeds: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2887-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Kind of odd right? Smells like smp_mflags problems. The "" argument before manager.cc looks odd: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -O2 -g -pipe -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4 -g -DDEBUG -I/usr/kerberos/include -I/usr/include/sigc++-2.0 -I/usr/lib/sigc++-2.0/include -MT manager.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/manager.Tpo "" manager.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/manager.o g++: : No such file or directory From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 10:30:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:30:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151030.k0FAUQjg030639@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-15 05:30 EST ------- Bug reopened as this package has never been 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 Sun Jan 15 10:30:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 05:30:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151030.k0FAUcoe030664@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 167364 depends on bug 166960, which changed state. Bug 166960 Summary: Review Request: Fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | 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 city-fan.org Sun Jan 15 10:54:05 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:54:05 +0000 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo Message-ID: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> The fuse-utils package was imported into cvs and built before the package was approved. The final package, if and when approved, will not be called fuse-utils (it'll be fuse-emulator-utils). Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be removed? If this is not the correct place to make this request, where is? Paul. From sundaram at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 10:57:03 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:27:03 +0530 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo In-Reply-To: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <43CA2A7F.8030405@redhat.com> Paul Howarth wrote: >The fuse-utils package was imported into cvs and built before the >package was approved. The final package, if and when approved, will not >be called fuse-utils (it'll be fuse-emulator-utils). > >Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be >removed? > >If this is not the correct place to make this request, where is? > >Paul. > > I believe this one is the right place. http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From paul at city-fan.org Sun Jan 15 11:02:52 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:02:52 +0000 Subject: Package-finding script In-Reply-To: <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> References: <1135374442.1969.17.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060114010323.GA16856@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <1137322973.24615.55.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 19:03 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:47:22PM -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > Here's a script I threw together to list all the packages owned by > > e-mail address. > > Nice. While we're sharing, here's a script I wrote to check the > status of all the perl packages I'm the owner of. It compares the > version of the package in the spec file to the version of the module > on CPAN. Perhaps the script could be enhanced to also pick up packages that are not yet in cvs but could be soon after a little bugzilla work (hint) ;-) e.g. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/168580 http://bugzilla.redhat.com/168583 http://bugzilla.redhat.com/168607 Paul. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Jan 15 11:16:55 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:16:55 +0200 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo In-Reply-To: <43CA2A7F.8030405@redhat.com> References: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <43CA2A7F.8030405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137323815.9831.36.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 16:27 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Paul Howarth wrote: > > >The fuse-utils package was imported into cvs and built before the > >package was approved. The final package, if and when approved, will not > >be called fuse-utils (it'll be fuse-emulator-utils). > > > >Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be > >removed? > > > >If this is not the correct place to make this request, where is? > > > I believe this one is the right place. > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded That's for CVS admin operations. For actual package repositories: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC3Status http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC4Status http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC5Status From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 15 11:20:23 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:50:23 +0330 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures In-Reply-To: <6b9c17630601141025j52b21163rc63e60934eb29c5d@mail.gmail.com> References: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <6b9c17630601141025j52b21163rc63e60934eb29c5d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137324024.3008.4.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 10:25 -0800, Jeff Pitman wrote: > > 2) Forget subpackages and make them one RPM with unified dependencies. > > You could pick this if: 1) it doesn't take much space, and 2) most > user's will use the component anyway. Well, the subpackage itself doesn't take much space, but the dependencies will. I also believe most users will not use the component. roozbeh From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 15 11:22:31 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:52:31 +0330 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures In-Reply-To: <1137268038.18432.184.camel@ernie> References: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137268038.18432.184.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <1137324151.3008.7.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 14:47 -0500, Ed Hill wrote: > And by splitting into noarch and arch-specific you can let > users choose whether they want the math support and its additional > dependencies or not. I can't say I understand how does splitting into noarch and arch-specific can let the users choose. Do you mean by splitting into subpackages, or am I missing something here? roozbeh From sundaram at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 11:25:05 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:55:05 +0530 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo In-Reply-To: <1137323815.9831.36.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <43CA2A7F.8030405@redhat.com> <1137323815.9831.36.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <43CA3111.6000808@redhat.com> Ville Skytt? wrote: >On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 16:27 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > >>Paul Howarth wrote: >> >> >> >>>The fuse-utils package was imported into cvs and built before the >>>package was approved. The final package, if and when approved, will not >>>be called fuse-utils (it'll be fuse-emulator-utils). >>> >>>Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be >>>removed? >>> >>>If this is not the correct place to make this request, where is? >>> >>> >>> >>I believe this one is the right place. >>http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded >> >> > >That's for CVS admin operations. For actual package repositories: >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC3Status >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC4Status >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC5Status > > > Thanks. I have clarified the information in the Wiki. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Sun Jan 15 11:41:58 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:41:58 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 10:11 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > >>On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:46 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: >> >>>One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services >>>is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a >>>click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links >>>for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the >>>%{url} of the package > > > I agree with this. Hm, and I promised to be quiet but: I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface ^^ if it is wanted. I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is something people will like. Ok... shutting up now. - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDyjUGQEQyPsWM8csRAmJkAJ0af8OgQWmiWO+VAK/9sR3qP3WC9gCggoVU 8VpB/JEarEX0cLjG5/RIHGg= =EZX0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sundaram at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 11:52:07 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:22:07 +0530 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> Andreas Bierfert wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > >>Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 10:11 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: >> >> >> >>>On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:46 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services >>>>is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a >>>>click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links >>>>for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the >>>>%{url} of the package >>>> >>>> >>I agree with this. >> >> > >Hm, and I promised to be quiet but: > >I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface ^^ if it is >wanted. > > Yes its wanted. A comprehensive package interface that covers both Fedora Core and Extras repository packages would be great. Look at similar interfaces in other distributions for ideas. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Sun Jan 15 11:59:40 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:59:40 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43CA392C.7070509@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Yes its wanted. A comprehensive package interface that covers both > Fedora Core and Extras repository packages would be great. Look at > similar interfaces in other distributions for ideas. I have and I will start working on this asap. I want to make it so that it can be used for core + extras as well as for third party repos etc. ;) Once I get home tonight I will sum up what I have in mind and post a little draft to the list... - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDyjksQEQyPsWM8csRAvfrAJ9A7QDsUFjqMg+2XI0YG5ijKISZ9gCgtlWJ 31bXh69OMCCWtifX0AHZfdk= =Nnw6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 15 12:06:45 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:06:45 +0100 Subject: buildsys hangs - no Job ID was provided in the time required Message-ID: <20060115130645.1bcdebff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> $ make build /usr/bin/plague-client build meld meld-1_1_2-1_fc4 fc4 Package meld enqueued. (However, no Job ID was provided in the time required) http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/builders.psp provides no status information at all From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 12:37:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:37:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151237.k0FCbh6Y009035@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-15 07:37 EST ------- wmweather+ is in Fedora Extras already. Dunno what the private bug 171491 is about, 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 paul at city-fan.org Sun Jan 15 12:44:45 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:44:45 +0000 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo In-Reply-To: <1137323815.9831.36.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <43CA2A7F.8030405@redhat.com> <1137323815.9831.36.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137329086.24615.58.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 13:16 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 16:27 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Paul Howarth wrote: > > > > >The fuse-utils package was imported into cvs and built before the > > >package was approved. The final package, if and when approved, will not > > >be called fuse-utils (it'll be fuse-emulator-utils). > > > > > >Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be > > >removed? > > > > > >If this is not the correct place to make this request, where is? > > > > > I believe this one is the right place. > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded I'd already requested removal from cvs. > That's for CVS admin operations. For actual package repositories: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC3Status > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC4Status > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC5Status Thanks; I've updated the latter page with the request. Cheers, Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 12:44:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:44:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151244.k0FCi9dE009527@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 07:43 EST ------- New version: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki-1.5.5-3.src.rpm %changelog - Add PreReq for httpd, since we use the apache user - Make mediawiki-math dependencies more specific - Package documentation for mediawiki-math -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 12:48:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:48:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177841] New: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor 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=177841 Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: roozbeh at farsiweb.info QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com This is a tracker bug for new package requests in Fedora Extras, when the packager is not already sponsored. SPONSORS: when you accept the responsibility of reviewing a package, please take it off of this 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 icon at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 13:01:11 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 08:01:11 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> ? 15/01/06 06:41 AM, Andreas Bierfert a ?crit: > I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface ^^ if it is > wanted. > > I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better > in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is > something people will like. Last time I spoke to the repoview developer, he was open to all sorts of ideas, so you may find it easier to work with him, instead of re-implementing his ideas all over again. :) Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From ed at eh3.com Sun Jan 15 13:48:00 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 08:48:00 -0500 Subject: Subpackages with different architectures In-Reply-To: <1137324151.3008.7.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137261369.3103.34.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137268038.18432.184.camel@ernie> <1137324151.3008.7.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137332880.18432.192.camel@ernie> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 14:52 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 14:47 -0500, Ed Hill wrote: > > And by splitting into noarch and arch-specific you can let > > users choose whether they want the math support and its additional > > dependencies or not. > > I can't say I understand how does splitting into noarch and > arch-specific can let the users choose. Do you mean by splitting into > subpackages, or am I missing something here? Yes, I meant subpackages. 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 Sun Jan 15 14:12:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:12:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151412.k0FEC0UG019307@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-15 09:11 EST ------- http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k.spec http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k-0.6.5-3.src.rpm - Get rid of desktop-file-utils - Add --disable-dependency-tracking & --enable-final - Changed "/etc/profile.d/qt.sh" to "%{_sysconfdir}/profile.d/qt.sh" Still there is a bug: E: smb4k invalid-directory-reference /usr/lib64/kde3/konqsidebar_smb4k.la -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Sun Jan 15 14:19:42 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:49:42 +0330 Subject: FE-NEEDSPONSOR Message-ID: <1137334782.15239.14.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Ok, I went on and created the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 I then used the owners list and the members of the cvsextras group to find the bugs that need sponsors to review them. I used the following URL to find about people in the cvsextras group: https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/dump-group.cgi?group=cvsextras&format=html There are a few ambiguous ones, that I can't really tell if they need sponsors or not. These are based on people who are in the cvsextras group but do not have any packages to their names in the owners list. They are: Paul F. Johnson: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512 Bastien Nocera: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 David Cantrell: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175980 I didn't make these a dependency of FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Would someone who knows more about the processes than me take care of these? roozbeh From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sun Jan 15 15:34:59 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:34:59 +0000 Subject: FE-NEEDSPONSOR In-Reply-To: <1137334782.15239.14.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137334782.15239.14.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137339299.4982.39.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > Paul F. Johnson: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 These two are related. I'm not sure why fuse-emulator hasn't been approved though. > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512 This one is happy and cuddly, though I do need to clean a few bits up. It also needs someone with a grasp on mono to approve. TTFN Paul -- "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 15:52:16 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:52:16 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <1137340337.2851.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 12:41 +0100 schrieb Andreas Bierfert: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 10:11 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > >>On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 15:46 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > >> > >>>One thing i would love to see in Fedora Extra's portofolio of services > >>>is a webpage with all the packages listed, plus their summaries, with a > >>>click-thru to a full %description, download links for src.rpm, and links > >>>for the various FC? releases they have been build for, and a link to the > >>>%{url} of the package > > I agree with this. > Hm, and I promised to be quiet but: ;-) > I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface ^^ if it is > wanted. It IMHO is. I put it on the FESCo agenda now and has its own page in the wiki: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/BetterWebInterface Andreas and everyone else interested: Feel free to fill in details and a summary of this thread and a proposal how you plan to do it. tia > I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better > in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is > something people will like. Well, that's an aggressive schedule. Have fun! -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 15:56:25 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:56:25 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 08:01 -0500 schrieb Konstantin Ryabitsev: > ? 15/01/06 06:41 AM, Andreas Bierfert a ?crit: > > I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface ^^ if it is > > wanted. > > > > I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better > > in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is > > something people will like. > > Last time I spoke to the repoview developer, he was open to all > sorts of ideas, so you may find it easier to work with him, instead > of re-implementing his ideas all over again. :) I'm sure you, andreas and everyone else interested will find a nice solution. And icon, thanks for repoview -- I like it. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 16:06:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:06:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169169] Review Request: JACAL: an interactive symbolic mathematics program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151606.k0FG69D6029331@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 11:05 EST ------- MUST items that pass: - rpmlint runs fine on output without errors or warnings - package name according to guidelines - spec file name OK - meets PackagingGuidelines - license open-source - License field matches license - license text in upstream and included - spec file in American English - spec file legible - source matches upstream - package builds on FC4-i386 - no BuildRequires - no locales - no shared libraries - not relocatable - no duplicate files - file permissions OK - %clean section OK - contains code - no large documentation - docs don't affect the running application - no -devel required - not a GUI application SHOULD items that pass: - license included in upstream - package builds in mock for FC4-i386 - arch-independent, so it probably builds on all arches - package installs and the jacal binary runs - no subpackages Suggestions and problems: - the package should own %{_datadir}/jacal - Summary field should better use words beginning with lowercase letters - Source field should better use %{version} - Use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead of ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} - Use "install -d" instead of "mkdir -p" - Use "cp -p" for copying files - Create 'guile.scm', 'go.scm', and the jacal binary using SourceN - ratint.tex (in docs) is probably unnecessary, as it is a source of ratint.pdf, which is also included. we shouldn't need to pack sources in RPMs Questions: During rpmbuild, I get an error in the %install process: Makefile:33: srcdir.mk: No such file or directory What is 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 icon at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 16:14:33 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:14:33 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> ? 15/01/06 10:56 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit: >>> I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better >>> in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is >>> something people will like. >> Last time I spoke to the repoview developer, he was open to all >> sorts of ideas, so you may find it easier to work with him, instead >> of re-implementing his ideas all over again. :) > > I'm sure you, andreas and everyone else interested will find a nice > solution. Well, it kinda amuses me, since web interface to packages is a problem with a well-known set of constraints ? both real and perceived. The greatest limitation is the attempt to make it not require anything on the server-side, in order for the mirrors to not have to provide special scripting-enabled directories and still have all the same data as in the main repository. While this is a worthwhile goal, this prevents me from implementing any sort of searching and other features. If pages were rendered dynamically, then we could just use yum's own sqlite databases to query and render pages on the fly, with lots of niceties, but I am reluctant to do it, since I like the simplicity of pre-rendered pages (a lot fewer bugs, a lot more secure). I understand that repoview also adds a significant overhead to the generation of large repositories (though I must note that on my P-Mobile 1.4GHz the entire process of parsing and then generating all pages for 3000 packages takes 80 seconds, which is pretty good in my book). What I think I can do immediately is implement a feature where the program finds ALL subdirectories with repodata in them and then generates one set of pages for all the architectures it finds. This way instead of having to run it 4 times for SRPMS, i386, ppc, and x86_64, you can run them in the /extras/4 directory and have one tree listing all architectures available. Would that be useful? Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 16:20:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:20:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151620.k0FGKhtd030578@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-15 11:20 EST ------- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-13.src.rpm I was manually stripping some of the binaries instead of letting find-debuginfo.sh do 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 gajownik at fedora.pl Sun Jan 15 16:34:43 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:34:43 +0100 Subject: Changes in fontconfig Message-ID: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> (maybe this mail should go to fedora-packaging list?) Hi! I've noticed that fontconfig since version 2.3.93 creates cache files in /var/cache/fontconfig (please see /usr/share/doc/fontconfig-2.3.93/README file for more information). fonts.cache-{1,2} files are not created anymore in directories with fonts (at least on my rawhide box). So my question is: is ghosting of these files still necessary? Thanks, Dawid -- ^_* From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 16:35:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:35:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151635.k0FGZILW031891@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 11:35 EST ------- Random comments: There are still spelling problems in the description: - progam, servicees (?), Nagios spelled both with capital N and small N. - also sentences missing ending dots. The logrotate file should also become Source1. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 16:40:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151640.k0FGe5Qw032359@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 roozbeh at farsiweb.info changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |roozbeh at farsiweb.info OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 11:39 EST ------- I can't confirm that the upstream source is the same as the included source, as the URL gives me a 410 Gone error. Would you please see there is an alternative URL available? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 16:42:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:42:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151642.k0FGgJGB032674@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From icon at fedoraproject.org 2006-01-15 11:42 EST ------- http://download.berlios.de/utidylib/uTidylib-0.2.zip doesn't work for you? I just tried 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 paul at city-fan.org Sun Jan 15 16:49:39 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:49:39 +0000 Subject: FE-NEEDSPONSOR In-Reply-To: <1137339299.4982.39.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1137334782.15239.14.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137339299.4982.39.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1137343779.24615.66.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:34 +0000, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > > Paul F. Johnson: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 > > These two are related. I'm not sure why fuse-emulator hasn't been > approved though. The last-posted spec URLs for both of these tickets are no longer valid, and IIRC had the wrong package name in them anyway. Spot assigned himself as reviewer of the main package but hasn't done much reviewing recently. The libraries have been reviewed, imported and built on a separate ticket. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512 > > This one is happy and cuddly, though I do need to clean a few bits up. > It also needs someone with a grasp on mono to approve. Paul has a sponsor (me) but I'm not up to reviewing mono packages as I've no way of testing them. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 16:48:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177818] Review Request: adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151648.k0FGmEiq000762@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-15 11:48 EST ------- > $ rpmlint adplug-1.5.1-2.20060101cvs.src.rpm > W: adplug summary-ended-with-dot A software library for AdLib > (OPL2) emulation. Headline-style "Software library for AdLib (OPL2) emulation" commonly considered better taste. * %postun script is broken during package removal: /sbin/ldconfig: relative path `0' used to build cache error: %postun(adplug-1.5.1-2.20060101cvs.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 Avoid '#' prefixed comments in your spec file below scriptlet sections. The spec parser inserts them into your scriptlets, which makes them fail badly when your scriptlet interpreter is not a shell, but /sbin/ldconfig. See "rpm --query --scripts adplug". * adplug-devel is missing "Requires: libbinio-devel". See headers which included binio.h and the dependency in the pkgconfig file. * Making good use of "make test" either in %check section or not could turn out to be useful (adplug is not fully portable yet). > # Remove doc "dir" > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_infodir}/dir /usr/share/info/dir is an index file, not a directory. Simple "rm -f" ought to be enough. Else it looks good. xmms-adplug is playing fine here (although I had to tell it where to find libbinio headers). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 16:52:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:52:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151652.k0FGqiHI001155@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-15 11:52 EST ------- Also, the paragraph "This package provide core programs for nagios. The web interface, documentation, and development files are built as separate packages" is now completely wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 17:05:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:05:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177619] Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151705.k0FH5G6q002246@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 12:05 EST ------- Not a full review yet, but random suggestions for the beginning: - The license file looks to be a stripped version of GPL, which is illegal to redistribute, as GPL only allows verbatim copies. I suggest contacting upstream. - Source0 should use %{version} instead of a hardcoded 0.6.1 - Don't use 'cp -ap' as '-a' also implies '-p': use either '-rp' or '-a' based on the situation - Remove the requirement on python-devel. it's not required to build the package. - I get a warning during build: /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/nltk_lite/parse/chunk.py:1247: SyntaxWarning: import * only allowed at module level - You should perhaps use 'install -d' instead of 'mkdir -p' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 17:12:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:12:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151712.k0FHCMlY002864@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 12:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > http://download.berlios.de/utidylib/uTidylib-0.2.zip doesn't work for you? I > just tried it. For whatever reason I can't get it from any machine in Iran, but I could just get it from a machine in Germany! Formal review coming. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 17:22:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:22:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151722.k0FHMj0n003890@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-15 12:22 EST ------- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-1.3-14.src.rpm -Fixed spelling errors and description -Moved logrotate to a source file I know I've said this before but thanks for everyones help on this, we'll be using it on the Fedora Infrastructure servers soon (whenever it and the plugins get 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 Sun Jan 15 17:30:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:30:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151730.k0FHUagZ004602@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-15 12:30 EST ------- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins-1.4.2-4.src.rpm -I've cleaned the spec file up quite a bit -gotten rid of some duplicate build requires -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 18:13:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:13:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151813.k0FIDXQr008487@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From i at stingr.net 2006-01-15 13:13 EST ------- Please fix my last name spelling :) 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 Sun Jan 15 18:17:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:17:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151817.k0FIHSWk008797@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-15 13:17 EST ------- MUST items that pass: - rpmlint output: E: python-libtidy explicit-lib-dependency libtidy I'm assuming that's ignorable because it wraps the library using python-ctypes. Does it? - license open-source (MIT) - License field matches license - license included both in upstream and in package as %doc - spec file in American English - spec file legible - spec file matches upstream - compiles and builds on FC4-i386 - noarch package so fine on every architecture - no BuildRequires in exceptions - no locales - no shared libs - not relocatable - owns its dirs - no duplicate files - file persmissions OK - has %clean section - macro use consistent - package includes code - no large docs - removal of docs doesn't affect functionality - no need for -devel - no GUI application - doesn't own files or dirs owned by others SHOULD items that pass: - builds in mock - should compile and build on all arches, since it's noarch and builds on i386 - functions as described: installed the package, the module works as documented on the upstream URL - no subpackages Comments: - package name should better be python-tidy, as that is the name of the python module it provides. - Remove the BuildRequires for python-devel: it's not necessary - Expand the %description, if possible - Add a BuildRequires of python >= 2.3 (as mentioned in README.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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 18:22:19 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:22:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060115182219.3E13A808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 5 denyhosts-1.1.4-2.fc3 libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3 perl-Module-Refresh-0.09-1.fc3 rxvt-unicode-7.0-1.fc3 wine-docs-0.9.5-3.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 Jan 15 18:36:45 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:36:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060115183645.19783808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 denyhosts-1.1.4-2.fc4 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.7-3.fc4 gstreamer-python-0.8.3-1 libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc4 perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder-1.38-1.fc4 perl-Module-Refresh-0.09-1.fc4 repoview-0.5-1.fc4 rxvt-unicode-7.0-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sun Jan 15 18:39:57 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:39:57 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:14 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > ? 15/01/06 10:56 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit: > >>> I looked into repoview and while it is ok I would love to have something better > >>> in place by the time fc5 gets around the corner. I really thing that this is > >>> something people will like. > >> Last time I spoke to the repoview developer, he was open to all > >> sorts of ideas, so you may find it easier to work with him, instead > >> of re-implementing his ideas all over again. :) > > > > I'm sure you, andreas and everyone else interested will find a nice > > solution. > > Well, it kinda amuses me, since web interface to packages is a > problem with a well-known set of constraints ? both real and > perceived. The greatest limitation is the attempt to make it not > require anything on the server-side, in order for the mirrors to not > have to provide special scripting-enabled directories and still have > all the same data as in the main repository. While this is a > worthwhile goal, this prevents me from implementing any sort of > searching and other features. If pages were rendered dynamically, > then we could just use yum's own sqlite databases to query and > render pages on the fly, with lots of niceties, but I am reluctant > to do it, since I like the simplicity of pre-rendered pages (a lot > fewer bugs, a lot more secure). > > I understand that repoview also adds a significant overhead to the > generation of large repositories (though I must note that on my > P-Mobile 1.4GHz the entire process of parsing and then generating > all pages for 3000 packages takes 80 seconds, which is pretty good > in my book). > > What I think I can do immediately is implement a feature where the > program finds ALL subdirectories with repodata in them and then > generates one set of pages for all the architectures it finds. This > way instead of having to run it 4 times for SRPMS, i386, ppc, and > x86_64, you can run them in the /extras/4 directory and have one > tree listing all architectures available. Would that be useful? Here's what I think.. I think repoview on the mirrors is great it lets anyone have a copy of it, etc. However, we could have a static link in the mirrored data that points to a searchable interface that lives on fedoraproject.org. Thoughts? Then again, I wonder how much of this is obviated by the presence of good searching interfaces in the tools we have in the distro, now? -sv From dcbw at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 18:52:09 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:52:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: buildsys hangs - no Job ID was provided in the time required In-Reply-To: <20060115130645.1bcdebff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060115130645.1bcdebff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, Michael Schwendt wrote: > $ make build > /usr/bin/plague-client build meld meld-1_1_2-1_fc4 fc4 > Package meld enqueued. (However, no Job ID was provided in the time required) > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/builders.psp > provides no status information at all Kicked. If you got this message, please try to requeue your job. Dan From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 18:56:44 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:56:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060115185644.4C45A808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 12 denyhosts-1.1.4-2.fc5 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.7-3.fc5 geos-2.2.1-3.fc5 libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc5 lirc-0.8.0-0.2.pre4.fc5 perl-Module-Refresh-0.09-1.fc5 python-sqlite2-2.0.5-2.fc5 repoview-0.5-1.fc5 rt3-3.4.5-1.fc5 rtorrent-0.4.2-3.fc5 rxvt-unicode-7.0-1.fc5 wine-docs-0.9.5-3.fc5 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 Jan 15 18:59:20 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:59:20 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 Message-ID: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi all. We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 versus FC4 with 4.0). - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only work if applications are compiled with it - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 But the most important reasons IMHO is: There are a lot of packages in the devel tree that were not rebuild for a long time. I'm inclined to say that the Extras Tree needs a quite bit of work before FC5 is released. Just look at your favorite mirror and sort by date (for example http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedora.redhat.com/linux/extras/development/SRPMS/?C=M;O=A ). Blender, tetex-eurofont, hackedbox, perl-IO-Tty, autotrace, ninja are just some examples from the first 12 packages that were not rebuild in the last year. Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. Do these packages still work? Are they still up2date? Are they orphaned? They probably did fail already during the last mass-rebuild for FC4 -- if they were not fixed until now then I think it's time to drop them now. There are probably more reasons for a mass rebuild that don't come to my mind just yet. FESCo talked in its last meeting about this topic, too. Here is the relevant parts of the discussion: 19:28 < thl> | jeremy, "Mass rebuild of Extras for FC5" 19:29 < jeremy> | thl: I still think we should wait until closer to test3 to even consider it 19:29 < warren> | Jakub mentioned further fixes to gcc/glibc needed before we do it 19:29 < mschwendt> | do we need a mass-rebuild of all Extras? 19:29 < mschwendt> | if so, why? 19:30 < jeremy> | mschwendt: it would be good to get things rebuilt for all of the new security stuff 19:30 < thl> | mschwendt, new security features from gcc 4.1 19:30 < ignacio|Sch> | Plenty of the packages haven't been rebuilt since 4.0.1. 19:30 < mschwendt> | jeremy, thl: okay, that's a reason 19:30 < thl> | mschwendt, and find all the problems that gcc 4.1 will show in the packages 19:30 < warren> | well, our gcc-4.0.x had the fortify source stuff patched in earlier 19:30 < warren> | but we should do it anyway 19:30 < thl> | IMHO it's better we fix those now once and for all 19:31 < mschwendt> | just asking because feedback on fedora-devel list was, well, poor. 19:31 < thl> | the question imho is: 19:31 < thl> | are the extras buildsystems fast enough? 19:31 < thl> | they are a lot slower than behivve 19:31 < thl> | and we need time after build to fix up stuff 19:32 < thl> | that broke 19:32 < ignacio|Sch> | I could see it taking 4 days to rebuild everything. 19:32 < mschwendt> | at least 19:32 < thl> | yeah, probably longer 19:32 < ignacio|Sch> | With the issues plague/mock has been exhibiting, certainly. 19:33 < jcollie> | is there any development going on in the yum/mock/rpm groups to speed up the time it takes to set up the build root? 19:34 < che> | Sopwith, where can i read up on bouncer? 19:35 < thl> | well, I'll try to start a discussion on fedora-extras-list about mass-rebuilding of extras for FC5 19:35 < thl> | that okay for everybody? 19:35 < thl> | I'll say that we'll do it around "test3" 19:35 < bpepple> | thl: sounds good. So guys, how do we do actually do that? Those people that have packages in Extras that were not rebuild in the past 5 months IMHO should kick of a rebuild as soon as possible, just to make sure everything still builds fine on FC5/rawhide. Note: Not all at once please, it must be possible for others to request builds in case they need to get a update with a security fix build. The real mass rebuild should happen around test3. But that leaves not much time to bring things in shape befor FC5 is released (only round about 4 weeks). That's not enough IMHO. And we need some scripts that automate the process! Has anyone something that can do that on the hard drive already? It should do something like this: a) increase release of all or some (see next point) package in cvs by one. Add changelog entry. b) request build of 10 packages (those that weren't rebuild for a long time first, the others later). c) wait for the buildsys to finish those 10. That gives a chance for other packagers to have access to the buildsys (to build for other dists -- otherwise it might take to long until important security updates get build) d) Go back to b) [or a, depending on implementation of a) and b) ] And what do we do with orphaned packages ( http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages ) ? Drop them now? Rebuild them and ship them if they build? Who fixes those that did not build? Or do we drop those until someone steps up to fix them? Who files bug reports for those packages that did not build and keeps bugzilla in shape? We need new tracker bugs for Fedora Extras 5 just as we had them for FE4: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157183 (FE4Target) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157553 (FE4Target-x86_64) (was there one specific to FE4 and PPC? Can't remember) People interested in PPC and x86_64 can look at the arch-specific bugs this way and help fixing them in case the packager has no access to that arch. Note to myself (please remind me of it if I forget it): we should clean up the devel tree shortly before FC5 -- we only should have one version of each package in it. This way we get rid of all old files with "fc4" in the release, too. Guys, comments please. And we probably need help from everyone to get Extras in shape until FC5 i released! tia! CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Jan 15 19:00:52 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:00:52 +0200 Subject: ADMIN REQUEST: please remove fuse-utils from development repo In-Reply-To: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <1137322446.24615.50.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1137351652.9831.65.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 10:54 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: > Can the fuse-utils package currently in the development repo please be > removed? Done, it will be gone from the public repo in a jiffy too. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Jan 15 19:09:03 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:09:03 +0100 Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report In-Reply-To: <20060115185644.4C45A808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> References: <20060115185644.4C45A808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Message-ID: <43CA9DCF.5090105@laposte.net> buildsys at fedoraproject.org wrote: > rt3-3.4.5-1.fc5 congrats, this must have been a beast to get in FE -- Nicolas Mailhot From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Jan 15 19:11:59 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:11:59 +0200 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Blender, tetex-eurofont, hackedbox, perl-IO-Tty, autotrace, ninja are > just some examples from the first 12 packages that were not rebuild in > the last year. blender needs more than just a rebuild: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176632 > So guys, how do we do actually do that? [...] > And we need some scripts that automate the process! FWIW, I would prefer rebuilding the packages I maintain manually myself. From bdpepple at ameritech.net Sun Jan 15 19:23:00 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:23:00 -0500 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137352980.28024.7.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.com> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for > packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found > Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that > point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. > Do these packages still work? Are they still up2date? Are they orphaned? > They probably did fail already during the last mass-rebuild for FC4 -- > if they were not fixed until now then I think it's time to drop them > now. Well, gnome-blog is a no-arch package, and shouldn't need a rebuild due to gcc. Though, it could use one to update the dist tag. /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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 19:25:16 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:25:16 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 13:39 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:14 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > ? 15/01/06 10:56 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit: [...] > > What I think I can do immediately is implement a feature where the > > program finds ALL subdirectories with repodata in them and then > > generates one set of pages for all the architectures it finds. This > > way instead of having to run it 4 times for SRPMS, i386, ppc, and > > x86_64, you can run them in the /extras/4 directory and have one > > tree listing all architectures available. Would that be useful? > > Here's what I think.. > > I think repoview on the mirrors is great it lets anyone have a copy of > it, etc. Agreed. But adding an additional directory (e.g. /extras/4/repodata and /extras/4/repodata/repoview ) that have repoview pages with links to SRPMs, i386, x86_64 and ppc won't hurt. Complete mirrors can mirror it. The other should ignore it, because some links won't work in that case. > However, we could have a static link in the mirrored data that > points to a searchable interface that lives on fedoraproject.org. Agreed. > Then again, I wonder how much of this is obviated by the presence of > good searching interfaces in the tools we have in the distro, now? I round about once a week use the debian web interface to search for something. Now and then I use the one from gentoo, too. I suspect that users of Debian, Gentoo or Suse now and then want to search for Fedora Packages, too. We should make it possible. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 19:33:10 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:33:10 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 21:11 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Blender, tetex-eurofont, hackedbox, perl-IO-Tty, autotrace, ninja are > > just some examples from the first 12 packages that were not rebuild in > > the last year. > > blender needs more than just a rebuild: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176632 Yeah. But the question is: Should we still ship the old version? Someone at least should make sure that it still works. > > So guys, how do we do actually do that? > [...] > > And we need some scripts that automate the process! > > FWIW, I would prefer rebuilding the packages I maintain manually myself. Agreed. The idea for the script I described should be modified a bit: a) for the 10 oldest packages in the current extras/development repo: increase release in cvs and add changelog entry "Rebuild". b) request build of those 10 packages. c) wait for the buildsys to finish those 10. That gives a chance for other packagers to have access to the buildsys (to build for other dists -- otherwise it might take to long until important security updates get build) d) Up to a specific date: Go back to a) We probably need repoquery to get a list of packages in buildorder. Can it do something like that? -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 19:28:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:28:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177859] New: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries 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=177859 Summary: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: dominik at rangers.eu.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libXvMCW.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libXvMCW-0.9.3-2.src.rpm Description: A Wrapper for XvMC libraries that allows the X server or user to specify the hardware dependent library at run-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 Sun Jan 15 19:29:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:29:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177859] Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151929.k0FJTnux015717@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=177859 dominik at rangers.eu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From dominik at rangers.eu.org 2006-01-15 14:29 EST ------- doh, wrong 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 skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sun Jan 15 19:37:24 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:37:24 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> > Agreed. But adding an additional directory (e.g. /extras/4/repodata > and /extras/4/repodata/repoview ) that have repoview pages with links to > SRPMs, i386, x86_64 and ppc won't hurt. Complete mirrors can mirror it. > The other should ignore it, because some links won't work in that case. > no problem for me. > > However, we could have a static link in the mirrored data that > > points to a searchable interface that lives on fedoraproject.org. > > Agreed. > > > Then again, I wonder how much of this is obviated by the presence of > > good searching interfaces in the tools we have in the distro, now? > > I round about once a week use the debian web interface to search for > something. Now and then I use the one from gentoo, too. I suspect that > users of Debian, Gentoo or Suse now and then want to search for Fedora > Packages, too. We should make it possible. We should define, now, what we want searchable and accessible from the interface. I'd rather not have a bunch of useless feature creep on the search interface. The simpler the search interface and display is, the better. An 'Advanced' Search interface is better handled by telling the user to use the search tools in the distro and not the web interface. my perfect search interface is: search:________________________ [submit] and _maybe_ just _maybe_ having a way of telling it what release to search (3, 4, 5, etc, etc) Andreas, Konstantin, what do y'all think? Does sound in line with what you were considering? -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 19:32:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:32:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177860] New: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries 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=177860 Summary: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libXvMCW.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libXvMCW-0.9.3-2.src.rpm Description: A Wrapper for XvMC libraries that allows the X server or user to specify the hardware dependent library at run-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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 19:43:24 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:43:24 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137352980.28024.7.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.com> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352980.28024.7.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.com> Message-ID: <1137354204.3473.105.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 14:23 -0500 schrieb Brian Pepple: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for > > packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found > > Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that > > point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. > > Do these packages still work? Are they still up2date? Are they orphaned? > > They probably did fail already during the last mass-rebuild for FC4 -- > > if they were not fixed until now then I think it's time to drop them > > now. > > Well, gnome-blog is a no-arch package, and shouldn't need a rebuild due > to gcc. Just my 2 cent: Python, libraries, the buildsystem, cosmic radiation or probably around 100 other things might have changed in between and cause the build to fail now. An, BTW, it IMHO simply looks a bit stupid if there is a package in a repo that is so old. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 15 19:48:37 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:48:37 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1137354517.3473.109.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 14:37 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > > > Then again, I wonder how much of this is obviated by the presence of > > > good searching interfaces in the tools we have in the distro, now? > > > > I round about once a week use the debian web interface to search for > > something. Now and then I use the one from gentoo, too. I suspect that > > users of Debian, Gentoo or Suse now and then want to search for Fedora > > Packages, too. We should make it possible. > > We should define, now, what we want searchable and accessible from the > interface. > > I'd rather not have a bunch of useless feature creep on the search > interface. The simpler the search interface and display is, the better. Agreed. > An 'Advanced' Search interface is better handled by telling the user to > use the search tools in the distro and not the web interface. > > my perfect search interface is: > > search:________________________ [submit] > > and _maybe_ just _maybe_ having a way of telling it what release to > search (3, 4, 5, etc, etc) > > > Andreas, Konstantin, what do y'all think? Does sound in line with what > you were considering? On the other hand: The debian solution looks quite nice afaics: http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 19:43:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:43:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177818] Review Request: adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601151943.k0FJhjRM016935@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-15 14:43 EST ------- Thanks Michael, excellent work as usual. Here is a fixed SRPM which hopefully works. 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-1.5.1-3.20060101cvs.src.rpm (Adplay and xmms-adplug are hopefully next BTW) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sun Jan 15 20:02:00 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:02:00 -0600 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 20:33 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 21:11 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > Blender, tetex-eurofont, hackedbox, perl-IO-Tty, autotrace, ninja are > > > just some examples from the first 12 packages that were not rebuild in > > > the last year. > > > > blender needs more than just a rebuild: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/176632 > > Yeah. But the question is: Should we still ship the old version? Someone > at least should make sure that it still works. > > > > So guys, how do we do actually do that? > > [...] > > > And we need some scripts that automate the process! > > > > FWIW, I would prefer rebuilding the packages I maintain manually myself. > > Agreed. The idea for the script I described should be modified a bit: > > a) for the 10 oldest packages in the current extras/development repo: > increase release in cvs and add changelog entry "Rebuild". > b) request build of those 10 packages. > c) wait for the buildsys to finish those 10. That gives a chance for > other packagers to have access to the buildsys (to build for other dists > -- otherwise it might take to long until important security updates get > build) > d) Up to a specific date: Go back to a) > > We probably need repoquery to get a list of packages in buildorder. Can > it do something like that? Why does this need to be scripted? I'd rather do something like the following: 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. 2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. 3) Maintainers rebuild their packages, fixing issues as they encounter them. 4) Close the bugs as they are completed. That way the process is tracked, you can see which packages are still wanting rebuilds, the maintainers are involved, and the packages get a bit more attention from the folks that know them the best. Just mt $0.02. josh From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Sun Jan 15 20:12:44 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 12:12:44 -0800 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137355964.29796.46.camel@localhost> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi all. > > We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora > Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: > > - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 > versus FC4 with 4.0). > - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only > work if applications are compiled with it These concerns would indicate holding off on rebuilding until the gcc4 changes can finish landing. > - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some > packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If > we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the > build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. > - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org > that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 > These would indicate rebuilding now so there's still time to fix things. > But the most important reasons IMHO is: There are a lot of packages in > the devel tree that were not rebuild for a long time. I'm inclined to > say that the Extras Tree needs a quite bit of work before FC5 is > released. [snip] > And what do we do with orphaned packages > ( http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages ) ? Drop > them now? Rebuild them and ship them if they build? Who fixes those that > did not build? Or do we drop those until someone steps up to fix them? [snip] > Note to myself (please remind me of it if I forget it): we should clean > up the devel tree shortly before FC5 -- we only should have one version > of each package in it. This way we get rid of all old files with "fc4" > in the release, too. > I'd propose removing from the FC5 package repository any package built before a certain date (which takes into account your first set of requirements above). That way there are no stale packages in the Extras repository for FC5. Maintainers who want to be prepared for possible issues with their builds should begin submitting their packages now (even if they'll have to be submitted later as well.) I would like to see orphaned packages require a new maintainer in order to be pushed to the FC5 repository. Ville's posted blender bug shows that pushing packages into current repositories without active maintainers can lead to serious issues. If we simply don't ship anything built before some date and we require someone to request the rebuilds then we'll know someone was working on the package in the recent past. If we do an automated rebuild we're helping to foster unmaintained packages. If we think the build system is going to be swamped we could think about assembling a second submission infrastructure to handle release time (actually, though, it may make more sense to use the current infrastructure for this and create a new one for higher priority, security releases. This would have benefits throughout the distribution's life, not just at release time.) > Who files bug reports for those packages that did not build and keeps > bugzilla in shape? We need new tracker bugs for Fedora Extras 5 just as > we had them for FE4: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157183 (FE4Target) > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157553 (FE4Target-x86_64) > (was there one specific to FE4 and PPC? Can't remember) > Do we need an "Extras Release Manager"? -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 Sun Jan 15 20:27:54 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:27:54 -0500 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > 2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. > 3) Maintainers rebuild their packages, fixing issues as they encounter > them. > 4) Close the bugs as they are completed. And what happens if maintainers fail to kick off rebuilds? Or there some sort of cascade such that an underlying dependancy package needs to be rebuilt at the same time as another package but package A and package B are maintained by different people? I've been in conversations with at least 2 people in #fedora now about weird oddness associated with extras-development rebuild attempts under mock where a chain of packages needed to be rebuilt together or else the rebuilt results failed. I really think an effort needs to be made to do a mass-rebuild and let notify maintainers based on the failures in that coordinated mass rebuild. The mass-rebuild tree doesn't necessarily need to be the normal public tree. But I think a mass rebuild should be attempted and the failures cataloged to see exactly how bad the gcc change has been for Extras. How long would it really take Core development to get its packageset rebuilt if each Core maintainer was individually responsible for rebuilds after the gcc changes? Instead of having a coordinated rebuild like Jesse pushed through the meatgrinder? -jef From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Jan 15 20:36:22 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:36:22 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <604aa7910601151236l5a53aabasd2601305181f7ac9@mail.gmail.com> On 1/15/06, seth vidal wrote: > Then again, I wonder how much of this is obviated by the presence of > good searching interfaces in the tools we have in the distro, now? #fedora does see a non-trivial amount of newbies who are not running fedora yet, but who ask specific question about the existence of specific packages. Yes 50% of those questions are crap fedora isnt shipping... but not all of them. a searchable webinterface which is not tied to an in-distro tool does have marginal use for anyone who are poking at Fedora and making a judgement about installing. -jef"even better if the webinterface can have some pointed language when someone does an mp3 search"spaleta From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 20:35:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:35:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152035.k0FKZO7a021328@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: Glide3-Mesa |Review Request: Glide3-libGL |- Render OpenGL through |- Glide3 OpenGL library for |Glide3 for use with 3Dfx |use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 |Voodoo 1 & 2 |cards URL|http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdeg|http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdeg |oede/Glide3-Mesa-6.2.1- |oede/Glide3-libGL-6.2.1- |1.src.rpm |2.src.rpm CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-15 15:35 EST ------- I've accidently removed the old version some time ago, but nobody seems to have noticed. So now I'm back with a new version and finally a descent name! : Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/Glide3-libGL.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/Glide3-libGL-6.2.1-2.src.rpm Review please! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 20:48:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:48:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152048.k0FKmZef022397@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-15 15:48 EST ------- I'll pick this one up. Changing to FE-REVIEW. First few issues: - No icon in the gnome menu visible for the torsmo entry (in system tools) - It would be very usefull if torsmorc.sample was included in the %doc section, without it no one would know how to configure it.. - I'm building on FC5, so build failed because all the modular-x sections were commented out. I think it would be future looking of you used a if %{?dist} = 'fc5' kind of construction, or define %modular_x = (%{?dist} == 'fc5') and %if %{modular_x} etc .. If you need some help on this i could look up the specifics. However guideline is that any package submited will hit devel first so it should atleast build on fc5/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 Sun Jan 15 21:00:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:00:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] New: Review Request: adplay 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=177865 Summary: Review Request: adplay Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: triad at df.lth.se QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay-1.4-1.src.rpm Description: AdPlay is a command-line player for AdLib (OPL2) music utilizing the AdPlug library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 21:18:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:18:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152118.k0FLIcwV025179@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From icon at fedoraproject.org 2006-01-15 16:18 EST ------- 1. Yes, you have a point -- should be python-tidy 2. Hmm... I could have sworn it required python-devel. At least fedora-newrpmspec always includes python-devel into the BuildRequires for python packages. Ah, well -- it seems to still build and work fine, so I removed it. 3. BuildRequires python >= 2.3 is really not necessary, since we're building for FC4 and up, and that dependency will always be satisfied. Final packages already depend on python-abi being the same version as build environment. 4. Yeah, libtidy is unversioned, and I'm actually not sure how to best deal with it. Ultimately, ctypes still depends on the underlying API remaining the same, and if the bindings didn't use python-ctypes, RPM would have hard-coded it to depend on libtidy-0.99.so.0. On the other hand, I don't want to specify it in the SRPM, since that would be just ugly. I'm going to ask this on the -extras 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 Sun Jan 15 21:28:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:28:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170978] Review Request: nomadsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152128.k0FLS9TU026056@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nomadsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170978 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-15 16:27 EST ------- Fixed package: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/nomadsync.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/nomadsync-0.4.2-6.src.rpm I actually detect FC version instead since it's a oneliner. Doesn't hurt to have a generic specfile in this case. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 21:33:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:33:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152133.k0FLXh6B026535@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-15 16:33 EST ------- :) Thanks... Is not having an icon an issue now? Some of my packages don't have icons where there are no pixmaps provided. You are right about a sample rc ^^ I will include it. I always keep two different specs for old xorg and modular x. I will upload them with the next package release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From icon at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 21:38:41 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:38:41 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137354517.3473.109.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> <1137354517.3473.109.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CAC0E1.5030909@fedoraproject.org> ? 15/01/06 02:48 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit: >> Andreas, Konstantin, what do y'all think? Does sound in line with what >> you were considering? > > On the other hand: The debian solution looks quite nice afaics: > http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages Well, that depends. I don't think all that is needed. Like Seth said, let's just provide two fields: Search for: [__________________________] Repository: [Fedora Core 4 ?] The search will be done on package name, summary, and description. Such a utility would be useful for newbies wondering what packages are offered by a repository and for people looking to provide a quick link to a package page for someone else, e.g. on IRC: what do I install to enable foo? http://fedoraproject.org/packages/?q=foo People who are interested in more than that are not likely to go to a webpage anyway, since there is already a number of tools that lets you query repositories. Sounds good? A+, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 21:35:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:35:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152135.k0FLZKqf026673@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-15 16:35 EST ------- I'll pick it up, changing to FE-REVIEW. Pre-review comments: - Package name: following mesa-libGL as example, it might be better to make the package name "glide3-libGL", ie Mesa is also with capital M, but choose to start with lower case 'm' in package name, for consitency it would be good to follow this example (don't forget to change spec file name too) - Out of consitency i would then choose to change the name of the shell script too, ie glide3-libGL - Licence entry makes rpmlint complain, but thats an ignorable warning. - However "and others" could be any kind of licence that would conflict with MIT/X11 licences, can't you stick to MIT/X11? If not, is there any way to clarify this a bit more? Or are you depending on the licence.html file being sufficient? As soon as you've addressed the above issues i'll go thru the formal review 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 Sun Jan 15 21:39:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:39:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152139.k0FLdFTB027114@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-15 16:39 EST ------- Not having an icon is not a reason to be blocked from acceptance, but for the end user experiance its much better to have included one. So if its available (or can be made) please do, otherwise its not a blocker :-) I'll be doing test build and mock build on FC5, and the intial cvs import will by definition be for devel too, so please make that the primary one, in CVS when it gets branched you can then update for other branches with different dependencies. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 15 21:47:46 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:47:46 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <43CAC302.603@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 seth vidal wrote: > my perfect search interface is: > > search:________________________ [submit] > > and _maybe_ just _maybe_ having a way of telling it what release to > search (3, 4, 5, etc, etc) Hey since when can you read my mind ;) That is really what I would like to have for the normal searches (adding a button for advanced search options always is possible as well). Here is what I tought about (even before it came up on the list now): Repoview on the mirrors is great. I is easy to use, static and good enough to find your way around on a mirror. What I would like to see for FC + FE (and livna ;) ) is a webportal which offers searches and a nice view on things. Form the tech side I would like it to be part dynamic part static, not use yum in any way (just the repodata files) and besides LAMP not require anything on the server side. The way I would like it to work is something like this: Have a dbms with a special layed out database which gets updated with package information on each push. The webportal will then work with this database to create its dynamic pages on request. As opposed to repoview (am I correct here?) I want it to maybe view a nice shiny table for the supported arches also have the requires, description, summary, evr and so on, have a download link, information on how to install this special package (with yum), links to bugzilla to file bug reports and all the nice and nifty features one can think of. An the user side everything should be easy to use, have a nice layout (css based) and maybe even support some level of wcag while at it. For developers maybe some information on how to checkout this module from cvs and so on... I will get working asap. As this is a community project comments and suggestions will of course be discarded :P - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDysMBQEQyPsWM8csRAmWOAJ46oSyILpU5yNP8yIT5JH1qJwL8QgCfT3Br +cMDE60BujrssC9olW1tFy4= =NgDk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mpeters at mac.com Sun Jan 15 21:51:22 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:51:22 -0800 Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 17:34 +0100, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > (maybe this mail should go to fedora-packaging list?) > > Hi! > I've noticed that fontconfig since version 2.3.93 creates cache files > in /var/cache/fontconfig (please see > /usr/share/doc/fontconfig-2.3.93/README file for more information). > > fonts.cache-{1,2} files are not created anymore in directories with > fonts (at least on my rawhide box). So my question is: is ghosting of > these files still necessary? It certainly doesn't hurt anything - and it allows the same spec file to be used with FC-3/FC-4 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 21:58:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:58:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170978] Review Request: nomadsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152158.k0FLwtAl028902@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nomadsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170978 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-15 16:58 EST ------- Would it better to simply BuildRequires %{_bindir}/wxgtk-2.4-config rather than fedora specific macros ?? How does the 64-bit package for wxgtk-devel handle that? (can 32 and 64 bit be || installed?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 15 22:11:25 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:11:25 +0200 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137355964.29796.46.camel@localhost> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355964.29796.46.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1137363085.28950.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 12:12 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > I would like to see orphaned packages require a new maintainer in order > to be pushed to the FC5 repository. +1 From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sun Jan 15 22:13:18 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:13:18 -0600 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > > 2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. > > 3) Maintainers rebuild their packages, fixing issues as they encounter > > them. > > 4) Close the bugs as they are completed. > > And what happens if maintainers fail to kick off rebuilds? Or there We'd be able to tell because their bugs would still be open. That would allow others to help out in those situations. > some sort of cascade such that an underlying dependancy package needs > to be rebuilt at the same time as another package but package A and > package B are maintained by different people? Bugzilla has fields to allow this. Package maintainers should know what their packages depend on. Mark package B's bug as being blocked by A's. > > I've been in conversations with at least 2 people in #fedora now about > weird oddness associated with extras-development rebuild attempts > under mock where a chain of packages needed to be rebuilt together or > else the rebuilt results failed. I find that bizarre for cases where one is truly just rebuilding. Have bugs been filed? Do we know why this oddness occurs? > > I really think an effort needs to be made to do a mass-rebuild and let > notify maintainers based on the failures in that coordinated mass > rebuild. The mass-rebuild tree doesn't necessarily need to be the > normal public tree. But I think a mass rebuild should be attempted and > the failures cataloged to see exactly how bad the gcc change has been > for Extras. To my knowledge, the buildsys doesn't have such a "non-public" tree. I know a scratch repo was suggested, but I don't think it has come to fruition as of yet. > How long would it really take Core development to get its packageset > rebuilt if each Core maintainer was individually responsible for > rebuilds after the gcc changes? Instead of having a coordinated > rebuild like Jesse pushed through the meatgrinder? That's all well and good, but who are you going to get to pioneer this effort? Not to take away from Jesse's efforts, but that was his job. There aren't many of us that get paid to work on Extras in that manner :). Seriously, if we can get a few people to help drive and work through a mass rebuild then I'm all for it. I'll even help. But I still think it should be tracked in bugzilla whether or not a single person is doing it or each maintainer. That way, if changes _are_ needed and a maintainer is MIA for some reason, we at least have some history of what happened and where the problems were. josh From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sun Jan 15 22:17:06 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:17:06 -0600 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137363085.28950.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355964.29796.46.camel@localhost> <1137363085.28950.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137363427.26382.17.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 00:11 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 12:12 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > I would like to see orphaned packages require a new maintainer in order > > to be pushed to the FC5 repository. > > +1 +2 josh From wart at kobold.org Sun Jan 15 22:30:22 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800 Subject: ghosting files with variable names Message-ID: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files (tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the files in advance? --Mike From icon at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 22:44:55 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:44:55 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CAC302.603@lowlatency.de> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> <43CAC302.603@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <43CAD067.3090607@fedoraproject.org> ? 15/01/06 04:47 PM, Andreas Bierfert a ?crit: > Repoview on the mirrors is great. I is easy to use, static and good enough to > find your way around on a mirror. What I would like to see for FC + FE (and > livna ;) ) is a webportal which offers searches and a nice view on things. The Repository-That-Must-Not-Be-Named won't be allowed on an official resource run by the project in any shape or form. > Form the tech side I would like it to be part dynamic part static, not use yum > in any way (just the repodata files) and besides LAMP not require anything on > the server side. 1. You realize that "besides LAMP not require anything on the server side" will pull in a whole lot more requirements than "have anything other than LAMP"? :) 2. "Not use yum in any way" is going to quickly become counter-productive, since you will have to replicate all of the functionality already included in yum, and do it in PHP of all things. Your codebase will balloon for no apparent purpose other than "not depending on yum." > The way I would like it to work is something like this: Have a dbms with a > special layed out database which gets updated with package information on each > push. The webportal will then work with this database to create its dynamic > pages on request. The dbms already exists ? yum caches all package data in sqlite databases. You'll be duplicating a lot of effort. Much easier to just reuse what yum already does well and fast. > As opposed to repoview (am I correct here?) I want it to maybe view a nice shiny > table for the supported arches also have the requires, description, summary, evr > and so on, have a download link, information on how to install this special > package (with yum), links to bugzilla to file bug reports and all the nice and > nifty features one can think of. The only things you list that repoview doesn't already do is: 1. Doesn't provide information on how to install this package with yum, since repoview is repository-agnostsic. Moreover, this isn't dynamic information, so can be easily added by just editing the template files. This will probably be incorporated in a future version of repoview ? I plan to change the API so you can just pass a yum.conf file to it and let it do the rest automatically. 2. Doesn't list the requires, since the output in its default format is really verbose and not useful: icon at protee:[~]$ rpm -q --requires abiword | wc -l 89 This includes things like libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.6) and rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1. This is eye-glazing material. Moreover, this doesn't handle nested requirements, so listing "foo requires libfoo" won't be very useful if libfoo depended on something like kde-libs. To be useful, every "requires" line needs to be resolved by yum to specific packages, with links provided, preferably excluding the "core system" since you don't want to list libc and bash on every page. However, this is a REALLY expensive operation, and if repoview did something like this, the generation time would go from 80 seconds to something like 80 minutes for 3000 packages. I've considered requirement information extensively and didn't find an easy and useful way to list this data, which is why it's not listed at the moment. Would it be useful? Maybe. Currently the drawbacks significantly outweigh the benefits. 3. Link to a bugzilla is also non-dynamic information and I doubt how useful it would be, since anyone who knows that "bugzilla" is not some bad B movie from 70s is not likely to use package search to file a bug. A better solution is "Click here if you need support for this package" that would link to a wiki/doc page listing the support options. Everything else repoview already does. It already lists all available architectures for a package, e.g. see: http://linux.dell.com/yum/software/rhel4/repodata/repoview/unshield-devel-0-0.5-2rhel4.html > An the user side everything should be easy to use, have a nice layout (css > based) and maybe even support some level of wcag while at it. Repoview already uses CSS, and I dare you to find where it's not WCAG compliant. :) > For developers maybe some information on how to checkout this module from cvs > and so on... This is, again, not dynamic content, and the usefulness of such link isn't directly useful. The URL field already provides the information on where to find more information about this software, and fedora CVS isn't externally accessible for non-developers anyway, while developers already know how to check out that module from CVS. > I will get working asap. As this is a community project comments and suggestions > will of course be discarded :P I have a counter-offer. I will write a small addition to repoview that would offer a small outward-visible python script, requiring just a cgi-bin directory. This script will accept one parameter ? query term that would be matched against name, summary, and description of each package and output the links to static repoview pages of all matched packages. I estimate that this will fit in 200 lines of code, potentially less. I also estimate that this will satisfy 95% of all users of such a page, and I would argue that satisfying the remaining 5% would require a lot more effort than telling them "yum install yum-utils" and "repoquery --help". Would that be a better idea? Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Sun Jan 15 22:59:13 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:59:13 +0100 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages (Was: Re: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair) In-Reply-To: <43CAD067.3090607@fedoraproject.org> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA4797.8000602@fedoraproject.org> <1137340585.2851.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA74E9.6010002@fedoraproject.org> <1137350397.8042.34.camel@cutter> <1137353116.3473.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137353845.8042.45.camel@cutter> <43CAC302.603@lowlatency.de> <43CAD067.3090607@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <43CAD3C1.7060007@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > > The Repository-That-Must-Not-Be-Named won't be allowed on an official > resource run by the project in any shape or form. I know but code written for a webportal can be used there as well ^^ > 1. You realize that "besides LAMP not require anything on the server > side" will pull in a whole lot more requirements than "have anything > other than LAMP"? :) Sure, just from the point of the webserver: Don't need Fedora and yum and repos and these things on it. > 2. "Not use yum in any way" is going to quickly become > counter-productive, since you will have to replicate all of the > functionality already included in yum, and do it in PHP of all things. > Your codebase will balloon for no apparent purpose other than "not > depending on yum." Yes I know it would but this is because I missed the sqlite part ^^ > The dbms already exists ? yum caches all package data in sqlite > databases. You'll be duplicating a lot of effort. Much easier to just > reuse what yum already does well and fast. I know I sould have switched from apt sooner ^^ > I have a counter-offer. I will write a small addition to repoview that > would offer a small outward-visible python script, requiring just a > cgi-bin directory. This script will accept one parameter ? query term > that would be matched against name, summary, and description of each > package and output the links to static repoview pages of all matched > packages. Sounds good to me. If this is not enough (which time will tell) I am certainly there to help out. > Would that be a better idea? Sure worth a try. If you need help just let my know. - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDytPBQEQyPsWM8csRAuR+AJ9pbtxN0kg8D6osUnAy5ysCTXxAGgCfevrt JSLjNTN1uF3S6BH33J5RCxI= =/BvE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From icon at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 15 23:05:50 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:05:50 -0500 Subject: A somewhat weird library dependency case Message-ID: <43CAD54E.10408@fedoraproject.org> I have a somewhat bizarre dependency question. Preambule: python-ctypes (currently under review) allows python programs to directly interact with low-level libraries without having to provide bindings. This is pretty neat. Not sure how sane, but pretty neat. Problem: python-tidy uses python-ctypes to interact with libtidy. I'm pretty sure that python-tidy still requires the libtidy API to remain the same, so ultimately it still requires libtidy-0.99.so.0. If it didn't use python-ctypes and linked directly to libtidy, RPM would have automatically pulled in a dependency on libtidy-0.99.so.0 Question: Should I do: Requires: libtidy (wrong, since it still needs a specific version) Requires: libtidy = 0.99 (works, but 0.99.1 ought to still be valid) Requires: libtidy-0.99.so.0 (best, but ugliest) What does esteemed public think? Regards, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From dcbw at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 23:19:41 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:19:41 -0500 Subject: Buildsys weirdness In-Reply-To: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> References: <1137279574.11384.4.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1137367182.2673.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 23:59 +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > Still sometimes getting weird results on the build systems, here's a > package build request (libtorrent for fc3) that failed: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2883-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Then later i re-asked it to build the exact the same src.rpm, and it > succeeds: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/2887-libtorrent-0.8.2-2.fc3/i386/build.log > > Kind of odd right? > > > Owell no biggy i don't mind kicking the system to get it working > properly again (did a local mock first to make sure it wasn't me > though), but maybe the room the servers are in could use a bit better > cooling? :-) It might be smpflags again, not sure. You'll note the build is doing make -j2. The two different commands for manager.cc are below. The "" is probably screwing the command up, because, of course, there's no -c... Didn't this problem come up already just a few days ago? Anyone else noticed it on other systems? Failed: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -O2 -g -pipe -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4 -g -DDEBUG -I/usr/kerberos/include -I/usr/include/sigc ++-2.0 -I/usr/lib/sigc++-2.0/include -MT manager.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/manager.Tpo "" manager.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/manager.o Successful: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -O2 -g -pipe -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4 -g -DDEBUG -I/usr/kerberos/include -I/usr/include/sigc ++-2.0 -I/usr/lib/sigc++-2.0/include -MT manager.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/manager.Tpo -c manager.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/manager.o Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 23:32:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:32:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177862] nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152332.k0FNWjiL004853@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177862 stickster at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-15 18:32 EST ------- I listed this on the wiki, requesting a CVS removal, on December 11: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded There appear to be a number of unaddressed deletions there. I am cc'ing the f-extras-l to see if someone out there can handle this, since I don't think I can (or should) do this myself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 15 23:55:49 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:55:49 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:59:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora > Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: > > - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 > versus FC4 with 4.0). > - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only > work if applications are compiled with it > - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some > packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If > we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the > build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. > - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org > that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 One by one, please. We need coordination with Core, so we really know when GCC is considered "ready enough", so we could start doing rebuilds. Those packagers, who track Rawhide or FC Test releases, possibly have verified already whether their packages need fixes for broken C/C++ code or changes that come with modular X. > Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for > packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found > Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that > point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. Most likely due to lack of policy or a roadmap. I'm aware that some packagers don't know whether they are supposed to update "devel", too, for every update they publish for FC-4 and older even if they cannot (or do not) test for it prior to release of FC-5. There's also the possibility that due to rumours about an automated mass-rebuild many packagers believe they don't need to do it themselves, ever. And of course, quite some packagers don't use Rawhide or not even test releases. > And we need some scripts that automate the process! Has anyone something > that can do that on the hard drive already? It should do something like > this: > > a) increase release of all or some (see next point) package in cvs by > one. Add changelog entry. > b) request build of 10 packages (those that weren't rebuild for a long > time first, the others later). > c) wait for the buildsys to finish those 10. That gives a chance for > other packagers to have access to the buildsys (to build for other dists > -- otherwise it might take to long until important security updates get > build) > d) Go back to b) [or a, depending on implementation of a) and b) ] ... and possibly in dependency order, where necessary. Hence I think it would be best if packagers got informed when they should start doing rebuilds. Package maintainers ought to get a feeling about what other packages in Extras depend on their packages, anyway. That knowledge is necessary for ordinary updates/upgrades, too, if they want to avoid breaking dependencies. Coordination could be done via bugzilla tickets or -maintainers list. > And what do we do with orphaned packages > ( http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages ) ? Drop > them now? Rebuild them and ship them if they build? Who fixes those that > did not build? Or do we drop those until someone steps up to fix them? > > Who files bug reports for those packages that did not build and keeps > bugzilla in shape? We need new tracker bugs for Fedora Extras 5 just as > we had them for FE4: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157183 (FE4Target) > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157553 (FE4Target-x86_64) > (was there one specific to FE4 and PPC? Can't remember) FE5Target is available for quite a long time already. I've been adding tickets to it while perusing open bug reports in bugzilla from time to time (highest bug number visited so far is #172794). > And what do we do with orphaned packages? Kick them. Unless they have been touched by an active FE contributor post FC-4. There have been a few packages already, which do rebuild, but don't work or don't even install without errors. We do the community a disservice if we offer packages, which bear the risk of either being out-of-date or not-working. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 15 23:53:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:53:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601152353.k0FNrFNv006699@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-15 18:53 EST ------- Formal Review Summary for 0.21-3: No blockers according to the review guidelines. But I haven't tested the intended functionality beyond checking that the service script starts and stops correctly. I'd like to test the provided sample, but I'm sure I completely understand how to test it based on the text provided at http://people.redhat.com/nalin/oddjob/. I'll start a 48 hour clock on this approval. If someone is intereested in taking the provided sample configuration in the docs for a spin and wants to report back in the meantime please go ahead. Full Review: - GOOD: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. all messages appear bogus rpmlint oddjob-0.21-3.i386.rpm E: oddjob executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/oddjobd W: oddjob incoherent-init-script-name oddjobd rpmlint oddjob-devel-0.21-3.i386.rpm W: oddjob-devel no-documentation rpmlint oddjob-libs-0.21-3.i386.rpm (no output) - GOOD: The package is named according to the PackageNamingGuidelines. - GOOD: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec - GOOD: The package meets the PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: The package is licensed BSD - GOOD: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - GOOD: 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. - GOOD: The spec file must be written in American English. - GOOD: 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/). - GOOD: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source 105265e2cdf9f2370373ee5432a5b4cd oddjob-0.21-1.tar.gz - GOOD: The package must successfully builds on fedora-core-development i386 in mock - GOOD: A package does not contain any BuildRequires that are listed in the exceptions section of PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: All other Build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. - GOOD: No locale files. - GOOD: libs subpackage has correct post/postun scriplets - GOOD: not designed to be relocatable, - GOOD: All the directories created in all subpackages are owned. - GOOD: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - GOOD: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. - GOOD: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - GOOD: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of PackagingGuidelines. - GOOD: no Large documentation files. - GOOD: 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. - GOOD: Header files or static libraries must be in a -devel package. - GOOD: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package. - GOOD: 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. - GOOD: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. - GOOD: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. - GOOD: No GUI applications - GOOD: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 00:09:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:09:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177862] nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160009.k0G09j7e008296@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177862 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-15 19:09 EST ------- nautilus-sendto*.rpm has been removed from the Fedora Extras development repository. repoview pages about it will be gone with the next push, too. The request for removal of the devel branch directory in CVS has very low priority. For ordinary removal within CVS, "cvs remove" is sufficient. The page in the Wiki is mostly used for operations which need admin privileges (or which ought not be done by normal users). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 00:21:32 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 01:21:32 +0100 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> Message-ID: <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files > (tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently > I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it > possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the > files in advance? Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. From wart at kobold.org Mon Jan 16 01:15:21 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:15:21 -0800 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <43CAF3A9.30200@kobold.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > > >>I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files >>(tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently >>I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it >>possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the >>files in advance? > > > Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time > generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. Then how do I ensure that these log files get deleted when the package is removed? Or should I not even bother about leaving them as leftover cruft? --Mike From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 16 01:27:52 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:27:52 -0800 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <43CAF3A9.30200@kobold.org> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CAF3A9.30200@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1137374872.26753.4.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 17:15 -0800, Wart wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > > > > > >>I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files > >>(tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently > >>I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it > >>possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the > >>files in advance? > > > > > > Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time > > generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. > > Then how do I ensure that these log files get deleted when the package > is removed? Or should I not even bother about leaving them as leftover > cruft? Don't worry about log files. Many packages (apcupsd, yum, cups, etc.) generate log files that are not owned by any package. From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Mon Jan 16 02:03:32 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:03:32 -0500 Subject: A somewhat weird library dependency case In-Reply-To: <43CAD54E.10408@fedoraproject.org> References: <43CAD54E.10408@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1137377012.19421.4.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 18:05 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Should I do: > Requires: libtidy-0.99.so.0 (best, but ugliest) If it's good enough for rpmbuild to generate then it's good enough for us to use. Don't forget the extra bit for the 64-bit platforms though. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 02:28:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:28:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177881] New: Review Request: lucidlife 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=177881 Summary: Review Request: lucidlife Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: admin at ramshacklestudios.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife-0.9-1.src.rpm Description: LucidLife is a Conway's Life simulator. The rules are rather simple. The game is started with a large grid of cell locations, and an arbitrary set of living cells. On each turn, each cell thrives or dies based on the number of cells which sourround it. A dead (empty) cell with three live cells around it becomes a living cell (a birth); a living cell with two or three neighbors survives; otherwise the cell dies (due to overcrowding) or remains dead (due to loneliness). It is based on the the GtkLife project, but with a more modern user interface and other enhancements. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 02:29:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 21:29:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177881] Review Request: lucidlife In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160229.k0G2TTkb021396@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lucidlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177881 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-15 21:29 EST ------- I forgot to add that this is my first submission to Fedora Extras, so I will need a sponsor. 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 Mon Jan 16 05:10:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:10:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177881] Review Request: lucidlife In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160510.k0G5AB4s003893@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lucidlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177881 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-16 00:10 EST ------- I just thought of something. My spec file currently has a direct dependency on GTK+ 2.6 or higher. Since FC3 is being end-of-life'd tomorrow with the release of FC5 Test 2, and FC4 includes GTK+ 2.6, do I really that strict version dependency there? I know it's probably a very minor issue, but I think it could help keep the spec file clean. Thanks for your input. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 05:53:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:53:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160553.k0G5rf2s007633@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-16 00:53 EST ------- 1) I picked up the Glide3 name with a G from the Glide3 package, from which this is sortoff / kindoff a subpackage (not really, but making it seem like a subpackage, so that people might actually find it is the idea). I took over the Glide3 package from Core including the capital G so thats a heritage I'm stuck with. 2) I took the license part from the Core Mesa package, I see they have dropped the "and others" now a days, so I'll drop that too, if you don't mind I'll wait with making a new spec and SRPM until the formal review (slow upload connection). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 06:08:32 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:08:32 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137391712.2820.4.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 00:55 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:59:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora > > Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: > > > > - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 > > versus FC4 with 4.0). > > - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only > > work if applications are compiled with it > > - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some > > packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If > > we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the > > build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. > > - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org > > that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 > > One by one, please. We need coordination with Core, so we really know when > GCC is considered "ready enough", so we could start doing rebuilds. Sure. Sorry, I forgot to say it explicit. I thought... Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 19:59 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > [...] > 19:29 < jeremy> | thl: I still think we should wait until closer to test3 to even consider it > 19:29 < warren> | Jakub mentioned further fixes to gcc/glibc needed before we do it > [...] > The real mass rebuild should happen around test3. But that leaves not > much time to bring things in shape befor FC5 is released (only round > about 4 weeks). That's not enough IMHO. > [...] ...would be enough. But that's IMHO not a reason not to ask packagers that didn't build there packages for a long time to do it now. (And I suspect that nearly nobody will do it anyway). More replies in this thread later -- have to do my job now ;-) CU thl From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Jan 16 06:09:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:09:37 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137391777.17219.213.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 00:55 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:59:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora > > Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: > > > > - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 > > versus FC4 with 4.0). > > - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only > > work if applications are compiled with it > > - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some > > packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If > > we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the > > build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. > > - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org > > that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 > > One by one, please. We need coordination with Core, so we really know when > GCC is considered "ready enough", so we could start doing rebuilds. FWIW, to me, the impact of modular X had been way more severe than that of GCC-4.1. > Those packagers, who track Rawhide or FC Test releases, possibly have > verified already whether their packages need fixes for broken C/C++ code > or changes that come with modular X. > > > Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for > > packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found > > Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that > > point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. > > Most likely due to lack of policy or a roadmap. Speaking as maintainer of SIMVoleon, I can tell you why I haven't rebuilt it yet: * Initially, there had not been any need to rebuild it. If I hadn't used %{?dist}, you wouldn't even know this package had been built for fc4 and it would remain functional until an incompatibility hits. * Later, modular X11 detonated in Rawhide and broke srpm/rpm dependencies of SIMVoleon and its dependencies, both in Core and Extras. Esp. getting the broken packages in Core fixed was a true PITA had caused major delays in fixing the packages in Extras. * Midst all this, GCC-4.1 dropped into Rawhide, breaking source code compatibility (SIMVoleon is C++). I.e. in a nutshell: So far, Rawhide has been too volatile to me to make rebuilding SIMVoleon feasible. Ralf From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 06:37:42 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:37:42 +0100 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > >> I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files >> (tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently >> I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it >> possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the >> files in advance? > > Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time > generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. It's certainly nicer when a rpm -ql gives you the log files one package uses. -- Nicolas Mailhot From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 16 07:10:21 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:10:21 -0800 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> Message-ID: <1137395422.26753.17.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 07:37 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > > > >> I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files > >> (tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently > >> I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it > >> possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the > >> files in advance? > > > > Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time > > generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. > > It's certainly nicer when a rpm -ql gives you the log files one package > uses. That actually belongs in a packages man page (or other documentation). From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 07:18:02 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:18:02 +0100 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <1137395422.26753.17.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> <1137395422.26753.17.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CB48AA.2030908@laposte.net> Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 07:37 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> Michael Schwendt wrote: >>> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: >>> >>>> I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files >>>> (tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently >>>> I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it >>>> possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the >>>> files in advance? >>> Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time >>> generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. >> It's certainly nicer when a rpm -ql gives you the log files one package >> uses. > > That actually belongs in a packages man page (or other documentation). That's exactly why it's nicer to have it in rpm -ql file location is something chosen by the packager at spec time, man pages often reflect other defaults (when they are up to date -> cf localized pages), and there is no canonical other place to search for it. -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 08:03:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 03:03:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177881] Review Request: lucidlife In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160803.k0G83DX4020391@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lucidlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177881 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-16 03:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > I just thought of something. My spec file currently has a direct dependency on > GTK+ 2.6 or higher. Since FC3 is being end-of-life'd tomorrow with the release > of FC5 Test 2, and FC4 includes GTK+ 2.6, do I really that strict version > dependency there? I know it's probably a very minor issue, but I think it could > help keep the spec file clean. Thanks for your input. I would be inclined to leave the explicit requirement, for the benefit of people that want to rebuild your package for other distros themselves (FC3 will go to legacy and many people will still use it, and someone rebuilds most Extras packages for CentOS too - see http://centos.karan.org/). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 16 08:26:42 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:26:42 -0800 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <43CB48AA.2030908@laposte.net> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> <1137395422.26753.17.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB48AA.2030908@laposte.net> Message-ID: <1137400003.26753.22.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 08:18 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Michael A. Peters wrote: > > > > That actually belongs in a packages man page (or other documentation). > > That's exactly why it's nicer to have it in rpm -ql > > file location is something chosen by the packager at spec time, man > pages often reflect other defaults (when they are up to date -> cf > localized pages), and there is no canonical other place to search for it. find /var/log -name file.log LSB I believe states that log files go into /var/log anyway - so /var/log is the proper place to look for log files, putting log files in other places would (imho) be a bug. From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Mon Jan 16 09:12:28 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 01:12:28 -0800 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages In-Reply-To: <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> (Rahul Sundaram's message of "Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:22:07 +0530") References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: [...] >> I would step up and work on a shiny brand new usefull web interface >> ^^ if it is wanted. RS> Yes its wanted. A comprehensive package interface that covers both RS> Fedora Core and Extras repository packages would be great. Look at RS> similar interfaces in other distributions for ideas. A start would be to run repoview on FC, which I logged over 6 months ago... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/161901 In terms of minimizing spam/feedback, why not have repoview (or whatever we use) generate a link to bugzilla (with the correct component/version prefilled) on each package page. Ideally the bug component could/would be extracted from the rpm and therefore generated automatically, but somehow that info would need to be added to specfiles. Alex From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 09:24:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:24:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177636] Review Request: rtorrent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160924.k0G9OsOc029851@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rtorrent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177636 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 04:24 EST ------- Build cleanly for FC5 extra's. other brances pending CVSSync. Closing bug with NEXTRELEASE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 09:25:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:25:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160925.k0G9PAnd029958@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 04:25 EST ------- Hmm confusing naming, Mesa is 'Mesa' and not 'mesa' in the libGL package (only changed very recently for modular x), but your right about the Glide3 / Glide3-devel package names, however its all PackageNamingGuidelines compliant and both cases have a disadvantage, so i'll fully trust your judgement on this. MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint output: W: Glide3-libGL invalid-license MIT/X11, and others - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (when changed to MIT/X11) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section (only ships basic so & shell script) - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed (3d programs use standard libGL for -devel files) - Proper directory-ownerships Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (licence.html) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires Package does have an exclusive arch, and the guidlines do have something to say about this (from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines): 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. However i'm not so sure Voodoo3D hardware even works in a PPC machine, or ever was put in a PPC machine (the only architecture your missing), so if this is the case you can skip that step of filing a bug for it. Please update / clarify the licence and i can sign off on the updated src.rpm and change to 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 Mon Jan 16 09:32:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:32:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171040] Review Request: postgis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160932.k0G9WCVR031005@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 Bug 171040 depends on bug 171039, which changed state. Bug 171039 Summary: Review Request: geos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171039 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE 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 Mon Jan 16 09:41:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:41:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171040] Review Request: postgis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601160941.k0G9fD9e031895@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-16 04:41 EST ------- Ping? geos now is FE. Silke, shouldn't you respond within one week from now, I'll presume you have lost interest into getting this package into FE and close this PR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 16 11:01:24 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:01:24 +0100 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:23:25 EST." <200601140623.k0E6NPGC016358@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <200601161101.k0GB1OlQ006030@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> bugzilla at redhat.com said: > I meant that I couldn't find any errors using rpmlint and mock. Sorry if you > found my comment a bit offensive as it seems my quote failes to bring > positive appreciation. Maybe just a general comment (if I may be so bold as to state some things that would probably be deemed obvious by many people here): it's all a matter of *trust* and *communication*. On the premises, we have: - a packager that has brought a new package to review - the fedora community that has brought a checklist of things to be checked before any package can go in the repository - you (the reviewer) that has accepted the job of taking the package and the checklist, and to go off and check that the package does indeed pass all the tests There are now two scenarii. In the first, you come back with the package and the checklist, and you show everyone the checklist with all the tick-marks you have added in front of all the items you have checked. There are also some comments. For example, for the item that says that the upstream tarball must match the tarball included in the package there is noted: OK - upstream tarball matches with package: checksum is 1012 etc. In the second scenario, you simply come back and say "it all looks fine" and show nothing. Which kind of review do you think will make other community members put more trust in you ? Cheers, Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 11:16:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 06:16:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169169] Review Request: JACAL: an interactive symbolic mathematics program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161116.k0GBG207010759@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-16 06:15 EST ------- One more comment. You should guard the %post and %preun scriptlets with "|| :". See bug 166958 and the respective change at http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/texinfo/texinfo.spec?r1=1.30&r2=1.31 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 11:31:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 06:31:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161131.k0GBVrMs012872@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bkw at weisshuhn.de 2006-01-16 06:31 EST ------- I for one was bitten by the removal of the fastcgi program. I fail to understand the motivation for its removal. Not everybody uses mod_python, there are a *lot* of folks running it as fastcgi under lighttpd. It's not that fedora ships - for example - only apache modules that are used in the default configuration. Does it really hurt that much to ship cgi-bin/trac.fcgi? btw. I also found it very handy to have tracd just for the occasional debugging. Also it is used in the documentation/howto. Leave out the configfile if you must, but please can we have the fcgi program back? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 11:50:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:50:50 +0100 Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <43CAF3A9.30200@kobold.org> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CAF3A9.30200@kobold.org> Message-ID: <20060116125050.28e4ba1c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:15:21 -0800, Wart wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:30:22 -0800, Wart wrote: > > > > > >>I've got a package that handles the rotation of its own log files > >>(tclhttpd). Each rotated log file is appended with the date. Currently > >>I 'rm -f' these files in the %postun section of the spec file. Is it > >>possible to use %ghost instead, even if I can't know the names of the > >>files in advance? > > > > > > Just don't. Log files do not belong into a package. They are run-time > > generated temporary files. Don't delete them in %postun either. > > Then how do I ensure that these log files get deleted when the package > is removed? Or should I not even bother about leaving them as leftover > cruft? Yes, the latter. In particular, since the log files are not marked as belonging into the package. (rpm -qf /var/log/*) Log file dumping space is ideal for automatic cleaning via cron jobs. You can't clean up everything during package removal. Other packages we've encountered before even tried to clean up run-time generated stuff below $HOME. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 12:02:52 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:02:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: ghosting files with variable names In-Reply-To: <1137400003.26753.22.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <43CACCFE.5070300@kobold.org> <20060116012132.3229f5ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43CB3F36.2020607@laposte.net> <1137395422.26753.17.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB48AA.2030908@laposte.net> <1137400003.26753.22.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <51950.192.54.193.34.1137412972.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> On Lun 16 janvier 2006 09:26, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 08:18 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> Michael A. Peters wrote: >> > >> > That actually belongs in a packages man page (or other documentation). >> >> That's exactly why it's nicer to have it in rpm -ql >> >> file location is something chosen by the packager at spec time, man >> pages often reflect other defaults (when they are up to date -> cf >> localized pages), and there is no canonical other place to search for >> it. > > find /var/log -name file.log assuming you have a pretty good idea of the logfile name Which is why rpm -ql is better - you don't have to guess the naming/location (and remember if you don't find the file it does not prove it does not exist - all it shows is you probably didn't look in the right place) (is the logfile named like the package name ? a random package binary ? a random binary function ? something else for historical/compat reasons ? is it in the LSB-blessed dir or a subdir or somewhere else entirely ? Does it use strange casing ? etc) -- Nicolas Mailhot From gajownik at fedora.pl Mon Jan 16 12:10:24 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:10:24 +0100 Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> Dnia 01/15/2006 10:51 PM, U?ytkownik Michael A. Peters napisa?: > It certainly doesn't hurt anything - and it allows the same spec file to > be used with FC-3/FC-4 Oh, good point :-) If I remember correctly, fonts.cache-2 files were generated only in Rawhide, so from now on they don't need to be flagged as %ghost. -- ^_* From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 12:06:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161206.k0GC6jUW017558@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-16 07:06 EST ------- It's strange. I've added --disable-dependency-tracking & --enable-final to Krusader's configure (in devel tree) and compilation failed with errors like: /usr/include/stdlib.h:626: error: ambiguates old declaration 'void abort()' /usr/lib/qt-3.3/include/qprinter.h:151: error: non-member function 'bool aborted()' cannot have cv-qualifier /usr/lib/qt-3.3/include/qprinter.h:155: error: non-member function 'PaperSource paperSource()' cannot have cv-qualifier /usr/lib/qt-3.3/include/qprinter.h:156: error: virtual outside class declaration I've removed --disable-dependency-tracking, the same errors occur, then remove --enable-final and compilation went fine, I didn't checked what will happen with --disable-dependency-tracking only. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 12:22:09 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:22:09 +0100 (CET) Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> On Lun 16 janvier 2006 13:10, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > Dnia 01/15/2006 10:51 PM, U?ytkownik Michael A. Peters napisa?: > >> It certainly doesn't hurt anything - and it allows the same spec file to >> be used with FC-3/FC-4 > > Oh, good point :-) > > If I remember correctly, fonts.cache-2 files were generated only in > Rawhide, so from now on they don't need to be flagged as %ghost. oooh, yummy, means I can simplify my FC4 spec (didn't remember when the fonts.cache-2 bit was introduced - do you have the exact fontconfig version?) Anyway I chose to fork specs for my package, mainly because I care most about rawhide and didn't want to perpetuate old cruft in the devel branch. And in a few weeks I won't be doing FC-3 anymore. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 12:23:13 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:23:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <41846.192.54.193.34.1137414193.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> On Lun 16 janvier 2006 13:10, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > Dnia 01/15/2006 10:51 PM, U?ytkownik Michael A. Peters napisa?: > >> It certainly doesn't hurt anything - and it allows the same spec file to >> be used with FC-3/FC-4 > > Oh, good point :-) > > If I remember correctly, fonts.cache-2 files were generated only in > Rawhide, so from now on they don't need to be flagged as %ghost. > > -- > > ^_* > > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > > -- Nicolas Mailhot From gajownik at fedora.pl Mon Jan 16 12:34:19 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:34:19 +0100 Subject: [pysqlite 2.1.0] installation fails without `--old-and-unmanageable' option Message-ID: <43CB92CB.7020404@fedora.pl> Hi! I wanted to update python-sqlite2 to version 2.1.0 but installation now fails if I don't use `--old-and-unmanageable' option: byte-compiling build/bdist.linux-i686/egg/pysqlite2/dbapi2.py to dbapi2.pyc writing byte-compilation script '/tmp/tmpLsv2cn.py' /usr/bin/python -O /tmp/tmpLsv2cn.py removing /tmp/tmpLsv2cn.py creating stub loader for pysqlite2/_sqlite.so Traceback (most recent call last): File "setup.py", line 143, in ? main() File "setup.py", line 129, in main classifiers = [ File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/core.py", line 149, in setup dist.run_commands() File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/dist.py", line 946, in run_commands self.run_command(cmd) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/dist.py", line 966, in run_command cmd_obj.run() File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/setuptools-0.6a8-py2.4.egg/setuptools/command/install.py", line 42, in run self.run_command('bdist_egg') File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/cmd.py", line 333, in run_command self.distribution.run_command(command) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/dist.py", line 966, in run_command cmd_obj.run() File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/setuptools-0.6a8-py2.4.egg/setuptools/command/bdist_egg.py", line 192, in run cmd.byte_compile(to_compile) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/command/install_lib.py", line 133, in byte_compile dry_run=self.dry_run) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/util.py", line 438, in byte_compile raise ValueError, \ ValueError: invalid prefix: filename 'build/bdist.linux-i686/egg/pysqlite2/_sqlite.py' doesn't start with '/var/tmp/python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1-root-y4kk0' error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.70739 (%install) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.70739 (%install) [y4kk0 at X SPECS]$ You can use this package for testing ? http://student.agh.edu.pl/~pmalina/fedora_extras/python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1.src.rpm Is this a bug in pysqlite2? May I temporarily use `--old-and-unmanageable' option? BTW Do you know where can I find good documentation about packaging python modules? For instance I'm curious why some packages create *.pth files (for example python-formencode). I did not find the answer in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PythonPackages Regards, Dawid -- ^_* From gajownik at fedora.pl Mon Jan 16 12:59:38 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:59:38 +0100 Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <43CB98BA.9050203@fedora.pl> Dnia 01/16/2006 01:23 PM, U?ytkownik Nicolas Mailhot napisa?: > didn't remember when the fonts.cache-2 bit was introduced - do you > have the exact fontconfig version? I googled a bit and I've found only this page ? http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/fonts/ It seems that these files were introduced in 2.3 version (FC-4 provides fontconfig-2.2.3-13). Regards, Dawid -- ^_* From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Mon Jan 16 13:02:36 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:02:36 -0500 Subject: [pysqlite 2.1.0] installation fails without `--old-and-unmanageable' option In-Reply-To: <43CB92CB.7020404@fedora.pl> References: <43CB92CB.7020404@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <1137416556.19421.12.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 13:34 +0100, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > You can use this package for testing ? > http://student.agh.edu.pl/~pmalina/fedora_extras/python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1.src.rpm I'll take a look at the issue tonight if I can. > Is this a bug in pysqlite2? May I temporarily use > `--old-and-unmanageable' option? Your call. There's certainly nothing "wrong" with it per se. > BTW Do you know where can I find good documentation about packaging > python modules? For instance I'm curious why some packages create *.pth > files (for example python-formencode). Now that eggs can be created it's silly to ask developers to add the path of the egg to every app, hence the .pth file. > I did not find the answer in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PythonPackages I guess I'll try to update that tonight as well. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 16 13:21:30 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:21:30 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:11:04 EST." <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <200601161321.k0GDLUMI007531@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/ This looks nice, but the groups seem somewhat broken. For example, the hmmer package, which contains the tag: Group: Applications/Engineering appears in the "Packages not in Groups" page of the repodata instead of the "Engineering and Scientific" page. Is there anything I can do to change that ? Christian From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Jan 16 13:22:59 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:22:59 -0500 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: <200601161321.k0GDLUMI007531@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601161321.k0GDLUMI007531@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1137417779.2096.0.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 14:21 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/ > > This looks nice, but the groups seem somewhat broken. For example, the hmmer > package, which contains the tag: > Group: Applications/Engineering > appears in the "Packages not in Groups" page of the repodata instead of the > "Engineering and Scientific" page. > > Is there anything I can do to change that ? b/c it is not using the group tag to sort the packages but the current content of the comps.xml file in the extras repository. -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 13:23:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:23:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168906] Review Request: python-nltk-data In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161323.k0GDN6or027135@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168906 roozbeh at farsiweb.info changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-16 08:22 EST ------- Closing, since there is a legal problem, spec and SRPM are not really provided, and it is somehow a dup of bug 177619. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 14:15:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:15:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161415.k0GEFXWB001614@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-16 09:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > I didn't checked what will happen with > --disable-dependency-tracking only. --disable-dependency-tracking has nothing to do with your problem and must not have any effect on your problems above. If it has, the package is broken. All it does it is to let the compilation rules being used inside of Makefiles not to use rules to generated source file dependencies. This speeds up building significantly during one time "configure/build/install" runs like those inside of a 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 14:17:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:17:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177881] Review Request: lucidlife In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161417.k0GEHPxd002002@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lucidlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177881 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-16 09:17 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > I would be inclined to leave the explicit requirement, for the benefit of people > that want to rebuild your package for other distros themselves (FC3 will go to > legacy and many people will still use it, and someone rebuilds most Extras > packages for CentOS too - see http://centos.karan.org/). I agree. Thanks for the advice, Paul. :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 16 14:39:06 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:39:06 -0500 Subject: A somewhat weird library dependency case In-Reply-To: <1137377012.19421.4.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <43CAD54E.10408@fedoraproject.org> <1137377012.19421.4.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <43CBB00A.3090903@fedoraproject.org> Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: >> Requires: libtidy-0.99.so.0 (best, but ugliest) > > If it's good enough for rpmbuild to generate then it's good enough for > us to use. Don't forget the extra bit for the 64-bit platforms though. Hmm... So I'd have to do a "bitness" switch. That's kind of annoying/ugly. :/ Okay, I'll figure something out. Thanks! Cheers, -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 14:58:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:58:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161458.k0GEwcEi008620@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 dcantrel at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From dcantrel at redhat.com 2006-01-16 09:58 EST ------- Warren asked me to add it to his list since I submitted it over a month ago for review for inclusion in Extras. I see wmweather+ in extras cvs, but there's no installable package for it. The package depends on w3c-libwww (which is also why I submitted that), which I don't see in extras cvs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 15:12:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:12:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161512.k0GFCXrQ010857@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 10:12 EST ------- I've added a Requires to fix the libgconf-java runtime dependency (thanks overholt!). Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-6.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 Jan 16 15:15:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:15:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161515.k0GFF0WW011263@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com 2006-01-16 10:14 EST ------- I built this RPM and have used it a bit over the past week or so on ppc. Things seem to work well and it all looks decent from my POV. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 16 15:39:46 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:09:46 +0330 Subject: common/tobuild file in CVS Message-ID: <1137425986.3046.13.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> What is this common/tobuild file in the CVS? Is it deprecated? If yes, would someone please cvs remove it? roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 15:44:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:44:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161544.k0GFirUt016721@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-16 10:44 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.3-3): - re-added trac.fcgi and tracd (comment #16) - re-added tracd man page Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.3-3.src.rpm Please check if this works for you (bkw at weisshuhn.de). If yes, I will push for new build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Jan 16 15:50:55 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:50:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: common/tobuild file in CVS In-Reply-To: <1137425986.3046.13.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137425986.3046.13.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <10669.129.42.161.36.1137426655.squirrel@jdub.homelinux.org> > What is this common/tobuild file in the CVS? Is it deprecated? If yes, > would someone please cvs remove it? It was used to kick off builds before plauge was around. I believe it is indeed deprecated now. josh From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 15:49:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:49:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161549.k0GFnqdR017843@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bkw at weisshuhn.de 2006-01-16 10:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > Please check if this works for you (bkw at weisshuhn.de). If yes, I will push for > new build. Works like a charm. Thanks a bunch, that was *quick*! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 16:05:23 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:05:23 +0100 (CET) Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <43CB98BA.9050203@fedora.pl> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <43CB98BA.9050203@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <63066.192.54.193.34.1137427523.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> On Lun 16 janvier 2006 13:59, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > Dnia 01/16/2006 01:23 PM, U?ytkownik Nicolas Mailhot napisa?: >> didn't remember when the fonts.cache-2 bit was introduced - do you >> have the exact fontconfig version? > > I googled a bit and I've found only this page ? > http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/fonts/ It seems that these files were > introduced in 2.3 version (FC-4 provides fontconfig-2.2.3-13). Thanks New FC4 package this evening then Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 16 16:17:27 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:47:27 +0330 Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <63066.192.54.193.34.1137427523.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <43CB98BA.9050203@fedora.pl> <63066.192.54.193.34.1137427523.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1137428247.3046.17.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:05 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > New FC4 package this evening then While you're at it, use the new version of dejavu-fonts, which were just released. roozbeh From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 16:37:46 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:37:46 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 16:13 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=FE5Target We probably should have some more: FE5Target-x86-64 FE5Target-ppc FE5Target-orphaned > > > 2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. /me wonders how to create more then 1300 bugs > > > 3) Maintainers rebuild their packages, fixing issues as they encounter > > > them. > > > 4) Close the bugs as they are completed. > > > > And what happens if maintainers fail to kick off rebuilds? Or there > > We'd be able to tell because their bugs would still be open. That would > allow others to help out in those situations. I just added the question What happens if a package has a official maintainer, but does not rebuild his packages in (let's say) 10 days after the official mass rebuild was proclaimed? to http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MassRebuildFC5 > > some sort of cascade such that an underlying dependancy package needs > > to be rebuilt at the same time as another package but package A and > > package B are maintained by different people? > > Bugzilla has fields to allow this. Package maintainers should know what > their packages depend on. Mark package B's bug as being blocked by A's. That's going to be fun. I suspect that won't work, but maybe I'm wrong. >>[...] > Seriously, if we can get a few people to help drive and work through a > mass rebuild then I'm all for it. I'll even help. But I still think it > should be tracked in bugzilla whether or not a single person is doing it > or each maintainer. That way, if changes _are_ needed and a maintainer > is MIA for some reason, we at least have some history of what happened > and where the problems were. If the solution is found how to create all those bugs for all packages it might work. Another idea: Tell everybody to rebuild. Wait a week. Fill bugs for all packages that dind't get rebuild. Wait a week. If the maintainers didn't do anything in between it can be rebuild by a special mass rebuild task force. If it fails - fix it or drop it before FC5. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 16:37:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:37:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176253] Review Request: clement-2.1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161637.k0GGbK9T028431@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jmp at safe.ca 2006-01-16 11:37 EST ------- Clement-2.1-65 was installed in production for our domain this week-end, so fare so good :-} So, if somebody is willing to be a SPONSOR for Clement, (an application trapping SPAM and virus at SPMT protocol level + mail tracking with a WEB interface), comments and suggestions are more than welcome. Spec Url: ftp://ftp.safe.ca/pub/clement-2.1/SPECS/clement-2.1-65.spec SRPM Url: ftp://ftp.safe.ca/pub/clement-2.1/SRPMS/clement-2.1-65.src.rpm Changelog - Making sure install and uninstall process are working fine -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 15:40:12 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:40:12 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137426012.2801.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 00:55 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:59:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > We probably will have to do a rebuild of all (most?) packages in Fedora > > Extras before FC5 is released. Why? Some reasons: > > > > - Fedora Core 5 will ship with a new major version of gcc (4.1 in FC5 > > versus FC4 with 4.0). > > - The new gcc has some enhanced security features that of course only > > work if applications are compiled with it > > - The new gcc and the modular X.org might break the compile of some > > packages. Most things probably can be fixed easily if we do it now. If > > we wait longer it might happen that other changes occur that break the > > build in other fancy ways. That would complicate fixing a lot. > > - rebuilding packages might expose some bugs in gcc or modular X.org > > that can then maybe can be fixed before the release of FC5 >[...] > Those packagers, who track Rawhide or FC Test releases, possibly have > verified already whether their packages need fixes for broken C/C++ code > or changes that come with modular X. Hopefully. But how many are that? > > Or just sort by name and search for the string "fc4" and look for > > packages, were no newer version with fc5 in the name is around. I found > > Macaulay2, SIMVoleon, cfs, cyrus-imapd, gnome-blog and stopped at that > > point. Those were never rebuild since the release of fc4. > > Most likely due to lack of policy or a roadmap. I'm aware that some > packagers don't know whether they are supposed to update "devel", too, for > every update they publish for FC-4 and older even if they cannot (or do > not) test for it prior to release of FC-5. Then we should have one for the future. > There's also the possibility that due to rumours about an automated > mass-rebuild many packagers believe they don't need to do it themselves, > ever. And of course, quite some packagers don't use Rawhide or not even > test releases. Exactly. > > And we need some scripts that automate the process! Has anyone something > > that can do that on the hard drive already? It should do something like > > this: > > > > a) increase release of all or some (see next point) package in cvs by > > one. Add changelog entry. > > b) request build of 10 packages (those that weren't rebuild for a long > > time first, the others later). > > c) wait for the buildsys to finish those 10. That gives a chance for > > other packagers to have access to the buildsys (to build for other dists > > -- otherwise it might take to long until important security updates get > > build) > > d) Go back to b) [or a, depending on implementation of a) and b) ] > > ... and possibly in dependency order, where necessary. > > Hence I think it would be best if packagers got informed when they should > start doing rebuilds. Yeah, maybe. But we have only four weeks from test3 to final. A "get your packages rebuild now" would probably take at least a week until everything is build. The buildsys will probably be blocked because it is flood by uncoordinated builds -- no chance for building important security fixes for older dists. After that week we could try to rebuild those packages where no one requested builds. Or do we want to drop those packages, too? > Package maintainers ought to get a feeling about > what other packages in Extras depend on their packages, anyway. That > knowledge is necessary for ordinary updates/upgrades, too, if they > want to avoid breaking dependencies. Coordination could be done via > bugzilla tickets /me fears the overhead of that, > or -maintainers list. Sounds better. > > And what do we do with orphaned packages > > ( http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages ) ? Drop > > them now? Rebuild them and ship them if they build? Who fixes those that > > did not build? Or do we drop those until someone steps up to fix them? > > > > Who files bug reports for those packages that did not build and keeps > > bugzilla in shape? We need new tracker bugs for Fedora Extras 5 just as > > we had them for FE4: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157183 (FE4Target) > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157553 (FE4Target-x86_64) > > (was there one specific to FE4 and PPC? Can't remember) > > FE5Target is available for quite a long time already. I've been adding > tickets to it while perusing open bug reports in bugzilla from time to > time (highest bug number visited so far is #172794). > > > And what do we do with orphaned packages? > > Kick them. Unless they have been touched by an active FE contributor post > FC-4. There have been a few packages already, which do rebuild, but don't > work or don't even install without errors. We do the community a disservice > if we offer packages, which bear the risk of either being out-of-date or > not-working. That okay for everybody? Or are there people around that want to build a orphaned-packages-task-force that looks at the stuff? -- Thorsten Leemhuis From sopwith at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 16:50:18 2006 From: sopwith at redhat.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:50:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: GPG key really needed? In-Reply-To: <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> References: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Patrick Barnes wrote: > > say "You can sign the CLA". If it's required, we should change it to > > "must sign the CLA". > > > They read "can" and not "must" due to the option of using a written > signature and postal courier. CLAs may also not be necessary in all cases. Posting/FAXing the CLA is not an option any more. People must use the account system, so the wording should be 'must'. > Part of it is availability. It is likely that more use of GPG keys will > be made in the future. Exactly - besides the CLA, the main reason to collect GPG key ids is their potential value in the future. Best, -- Elliot Red Hat Summit Nashville (May 30 - June 2, 2006) http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/ From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 16:31:27 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:31:27 +0100 (CET) Subject: Changes in fontconfig In-Reply-To: <1137428247.3046.17.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <43CA79A3.1010405@fedora.pl> <1137361882.26753.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <43CB8D30.6030600@fedora.pl> <63123.192.54.193.34.1137414129.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <43CB98BA.9050203@fedora.pl> <63066.192.54.193.34.1137427523.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1137428247.3046.17.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <46909.192.54.193.34.1137429087.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> On Lun 16 janvier 2006 17:17, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:05 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> New FC4 package this evening then > > While you're at it, use the new version of dejavu-fonts, which were just > released. It's already been done ;) The build queue (http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/success.psp) is waiting for a Fedora fairy to push it to unsuspecting users. -- Nicolas Mailhot From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Jan 16 17:00:32 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:00:32 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:37 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 16:13 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: > > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > Another idea: Tell everybody to rebuild. Wait a week. Fill bugs for all > packages that dind't get rebuild. This only works if packages build-deps are independent of each other. In reality, a package depends on a tree of packages. Therefore you have to sequentially rebuilt from the root of the tree of package deps and can't "Tell everybody to rebuild" (== rebuild everything at once). > Wait a week. If the maintainers didn't > do anything in between it can be rebuild by a special mass rebuild task > force. If it fails - fix it or drop it before FC5. Ralf From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Jan 16 17:12:03 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:12:03 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:22:59 EST." <1137417779.2096.0.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <200601161712.k0GHC3A2012049@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > b/c it is not using the group tag to sort the packages but the current > content of the comps.xml file in the extras repository. Ok. Is it a file I can somehow update ? I can't seem to be able to find it in CVS... I think I have all the packages locally. Can you tell me the name of the module I need to checkout ? Christian From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 17:30:48 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:30:48 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137273436.22283.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137273436.22283.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137432648.2801.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 23:17 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 13:58 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 14.01.2006, 09:16 +0000 schrieb David Woodhouse: > > > I'd like to get rid of 'knownvariants' in the helper script, > > > > Why? We did something like this in the spec file itself before. > > I'd like to get rid of that from both the specfile _and_ the script. :-) > But if we want to support "--define"less rebuilds for arbitrary custom > (but compatible) currently running kernels, AFAICS that would require us > to be able to extract the variant off a random "uname -r" string, which > I don't think is possible. Agreed. > > This solution IMHO is cleaner. > Agreed, it's an improvement, but: > > > it's important for people that plan to rebuild the srpm at home for > > their current kernel without giving any of the "--define foo bar" > > parameters. > > That works only if their kernel variant is one of the known variants :( Sure. That's brings me to another question: Will we ship /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/kmodtool in the package "rpm-build" or do we plan to ship it in a separate package and let rpm-build depend on it? I would prefer the latter -- this way updates would be a lot easier, especially now that the script and the standard is still quite new. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 17:17:52 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:17:52 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 18:00 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:37 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 16:13 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: > > > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > > > Another idea: Tell everybody to rebuild. Wait a week. Fill bugs for all > > packages that dind't get rebuild. > > This only works if packages build-deps are independent of each other. In > reality, a package depends on a tree of packages. > > Therefore you have to sequentially rebuilt from the root of the tree of > package deps and can't "Tell everybody to rebuild" (== rebuild > everything at once). Two questions: - how was the order ensured when we did the FE4 mass rebuild? - how was it handled in fedora core when the mass rebuild for gcc 4.1 happend? *If* the answer is "it was ignored" I'm inclined to do exactly that for FE5, too, *if* no one steps up and presents a proper solution. AFAICS this could be: - create the bugs with the correct deps in the build order (remember: we have over 1300 packages iirc, doing this manually won't work) - we have a script that builds everything in the correct order - we drop the complete extras tree and start a new one in parallel - CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 16 17:35:01 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:05:01 +0330 Subject: taking on a few orphaned packages Message-ID: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> OK, I went and took on a few orphaned packages, namely autotrace, gtranslator, t1lib, t1utils, and ttf2pt1. Will start with gcc 4.1 testing and existing bugs. Just to let everyone know. roozbeh From oliver.andrich at gmail.com Mon Jan 16 17:47:46 2006 From: oliver.andrich at gmail.com (Oliver Andrich) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:47:46 +0100 Subject: GPG key really needed? In-Reply-To: References: <1137208739.13376.19.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <43C875A9.9060109@n-man.com> Message-ID: <20060116174746.GA2993@fitheach> On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 11:50:18AM -0500, Elliot Lee wrote: > > Part of it is availability. It is likely that more use of GPG keys will > > be made in the future. > > Exactly - besides the CLA, the main reason to collect GPG key ids is their > potential value in the future. Sorry, to distract a little from the topic. But I just had to face to loss of my gpg stuff. So I was unable to revoke the "original" key, I just changed my account to the new key, I will use in the future. (Now with a printed revoke key in a secure place.) Do I have to sign the CLA again? Best regards, Oliver -- Oliver Andrich --- oliver.andrich at gmail.com --- http://roughbook.de/ From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Mon Jan 16 17:59:26 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:59:26 -0800 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137426012.2801.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137426012.2801.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137434366.3612.31.camel@localhost> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 16:40 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 00:55 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > And what do we do with orphaned packages? > > > > Kick them. Unless they have been touched by an active FE contributor post > > FC-4. There have been a few packages already, which do rebuild, but don't > > work or don't even install without errors. We do the community a disservice > > if we offer packages, which bear the risk of either being out-of-date or > > not-working. > > That okay for everybody? Or are there people around that want to build a > orphaned-packages-task-force that looks at the stuff? Unfortunately, there's nothing that can help an orphaned package except to be adopted. Someone has to commit to fixing the package if it breaks or has security holes through the FC release cycle. A task force would have to be directed at attracting packagers to take on the burden of the orphaned packages; not just a quick "how do we fix these in time for FC5?" That might have some interesting applications... for instance, it could be part of training new packagers to have someone guide them through updating and getting an orphaned package back into the fold. Or someone could use a particular package for a couple weeks and write a review for the month that attempts to get packagers interested in continuing its maintenance. But I don't think we can put together something scalable enough to make an impact for FC5. -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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 18:06:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:06:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161806.k0GI63V0013107@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 13:05 EST ------- I'll pick this one up for review. It builds cleanly, however i've not been able to mock build this package since itext hasn't been included in fedora(-extras) yet, but it looks like it should. Functionally it works well for me too. Spec file needs work though, rpmlint becomes mad over a few things: E: rssowl explicit-lib-dependency libgconf-java This is an ignorable error, even though we wish it did, rpm doesn't autodepend this properly, so explicit require should stay. No fix needed E: rssowl description-line-too-long RSSOwl is a RSS / RDF / Atom Newsreader written in Java using SWT as fast graphic library. Read News in a tabfolder, save favorites in categories, Export to PDF / RTF / HTML / OPML, Import Feeds from OPML, perform fulltext-search, use the integrated browser. Please contact bpasero at rssowl.org if you have any questions or problems regarding this version. Description lines should be wraped at 80 (or even 78) characters, so it fits on any console, please add some wrapping to this text :-) W: rssowl non-standard-group Productivity/Networking/News Please pick one of FE's standard groups and stick to it :-) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups My suggestion would be "Applications/Internet" for this package. W: rssowl incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.2-6fc 1.2-6 Version entry should be without the 'fc' in the changelog W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/popups.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_usersets.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/faq.xml W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/styles/rssowldocs.css W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_webfeeds.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_subscrips.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_ampheta.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/index.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/LICENSE.txt W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_proxy.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_offline.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/README.txt W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/faq.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/menus.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_browser.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/CHANGELOG.txt W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/quickstart.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/resources.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/dialogs.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_reload.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/rssowl_i18n.template W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/howto.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_searchagg.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/tipstricks.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_manage.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/ht_eximprint.html W: rssowl wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/elements.html Please add dos2unix (as in the package name) to build requires, and run dos2unix in the spec file on those files; dos2unix does allow * in the files to convert so you could do: dos2unix %{_docdir}/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/*.html dos2unix %{_docdir}/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/styles/* dos2unix %{_docdir}/rssowl-1.2/tutorial/en/*.html dos2unix %{_docdir}/rssowl-1.2/*.{xml,html,txt,template}} inside the specfile (as last part of the %install section) W: rssowl one-line-command-in-%post /usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db W: rssowl one-line-command-in-%postun /usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db You can fix these by making it: %post -p %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db E: rssowl standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/icons (Actually same goes for applications and pixmaps but rpmlint doesn't check these). Please change to atleast: %{_datadir}/applications /* %{_datadir}/pixmaps/* %{_datadir}/icons/* So the package doesn't end up owning the (fedora/freedesktop standard) directories. Please also change the summary, shouldn't start with the package name, better would be: "Free RSS / RDF / Atom Newsreader". Or you could even omit the "Free" part, because it being included in fedora extra's implicitly implies that it IS free, there's no pay-for or not open source software in fedora extra's, so this "free" description applies for every package in FE :-) So even better would be: "An RSS, RDF and Atom Newsreader" For the rest it looks good. Please correct the above described errors and warnings and i'll go thru the complete formal checklist. Changing blocker bug to FE-REVIEW. Feel free to assign the bug to me (not in fedorabugs group yet so can't do this for 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 18:15:23 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:15:23 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137435323.2801.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 00:00 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 16:27 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Freitag, den 13.01.2006, 08:59 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > > > The other part that shuffles stuff around %prep/%build/%install can > > > result in specfile simplifications, > > > > Agreed. And there is an additional benefit: the debug-packages are a lot > > smaller if you build more then one > > Hm, something missing from that sentence, Sorry, seems I got distracted at that point. > eg. "variant in the same dir"? Yes, that would probably fit in well ;-) > Actually, if I understand correctly, that's not a benefit, it's > breakage. The debuginfo packages would then contain the symbols and > sources primarily for the last variant built in the loop plus possible > leftovers from earlier builds, with probably most of the earlier builds' > stuff overwritten or removed. /me thinks about this for a moment -- Yeah, seems you are correct. > Both the contents of the sources and symbols may and do differ between > variants, and it's possible for some variants to contain modules and > sources not at all present for others (which should be obviously > avoided). The lirc package is an example of all this. I should have thought of that. /me hides > > If no one complains loudly soon about this fedora-kmodhelper idea in > > above srpm then I think I'll work on modifying the last > > extras-kmod-proposal to a solution with the fedora-kmodhelper scheme. > > +1 There is still one thing in my mind and I'd like to get other opinions on it: Should we have add a %{?kmod_per_package_add-on} into the output that get_rpmtemplate creates? *If* a spec file needs something special in each kmod package it could add a %define kmod_per_package_add-on put stupid things here \ probably even with newlines in them in the spec file and get that part included in each kmod-Package. Take for example the nvidia-drivers of a well known 3rd party repo: they currently have a Conflicts: kernel-module-nvidia-legacy-%{kernel} in them -- that would not be possible with the new scheme and that sounds like a problem to me. They also have some special things for %pre and %post which lead to the question: Do we also need something like %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_pre} %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_postun} The whole kmodtools function would look like this (original stuff quoted): > get_rpmtemplate () > { > if [[ "${1}" = "up" ]] || [[ "${1}" = "UP" ]] ; then > local variant="" > elif [[ "${1}" ]] ; then > local variant="${1}" > local dashvariant="-${1}" > fi > > cat < %package -n kmod-${kmod_name}${dashvariant} > Summary: ${kmod_name} kernel module(s) > Group: System Environment/Kernel > Provides: kernel-module = ${verrel}${variant} > Provides: kmod-${kmod_name} = %{version}-%{release} > Requires: kernel-%{_target_cpu} = ${verrel}${variant} > Requires: ${kmod_name}-kmod-common = %{version} > Requires(post): /sbin/depmod > Requires(postun): /sbin/depmod > BuildRequires: kernel-devel-%{_target_cpu} = ${verrel}${variant} %{?kmod_per_package_add-on} > %description -n kmod-${kmod_name}${dashvariant} > This package provides the ${kmod_name} kernel modules built for the Linux > kernel ${verrel}${variant} for the %{_target_cpu} family of processors. > %post -n kmod-${kmod_name}${dashvariant} > /sbin/depmod -aeF /boot/System.map-${verrel}${variant} ${verrel}${variant} > /dev/null || : %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_post} > %postun -n kmod-${kmod_name}${dashvariant} > /sbin/depmod -aF /boot/System.map-${verrel}${variant} ${verrel}${variant} &> /dev/null || : %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_postun} > %files -n kmod-${kmod_name}${dashvariant} > %defattr(644,root,root,755) > /lib/modules/${verrel}${variant}/extra/${kmod_name}/ > > EOF > } Back to the original mail: > Here's a couple of updated example packages, converted to use kmodhelper > (I suggest /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/kmodtool and %{kmodtool} for it, BTW) Yeah, sounds good. > and > avoiding debuginfo problems. Also added some additional known variants > to the script. The code in both packages is in a pretty bad shape > regarding the latest Rawhide kernels (most modules disabled in lirc, > thinkpad doesn't compile at all), but better on FC4, and anyway good > enough for illustration purposes. > > http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.8.pre4.2.6.15_1.1853_FC5.src.rpm > http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-7.2.6.14_1.1656_FC4.src.rpm Creat, thanks! Looks quite good. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From stickster at gmail.com Mon Jan 16 18:15:12 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:15:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177862] nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development In-Reply-To: <200601160009.k0G09j7e008296@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200601160009.k0G09j7e008296@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137435313.15396.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:09 -0500, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-15 19:09 EST ------- > nautilus-sendto*.rpm has been removed from the Fedora Extras development > repository. repoview pages about it will be gone with the next push, too. > > The request for removal of the devel branch directory in CVS has very low > priority. For ordinary removal within CVS, "cvs remove" is sufficient. > The page in the Wiki is mostly used for operations which need admin > privileges (or which ought not be done by normal users). Thanks for the clarification. I've added this as a note on the wiki. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Mon Jan 16 18:19:28 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:19:28 +0200 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137435568.4383.7.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Two questions: > > - how was the order ensured when we did the FE4 mass rebuild? > - how was it handled in fedora core when the mass rebuild for gcc 4.1 > happend? > > *If* the answer is "it was ignored" I'm inclined to do exactly that for > FE5, too, *if* no one steps up and presents a proper solution. > > AFAICS this could be: > > - create the bugs with the correct deps in the build order (remember: we > have over 1300 packages iirc, doing this manually won't work) > - we have a script that builds everything in the correct order I've no idea how the FE4 mass rebuild was handled but mach does topological sort on the lot for you if you just dump all src.rpm's into it in one go. So, you could either use mach for calculating the order or lift off the relevant code from there for use with yum repodata. No, I'm not offering to do that, don't have time ATM, sorry :) - Panu - From mpeters at mac.com Mon Jan 16 18:17:39 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:17:39 -0800 Subject: taking on a few orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137435460.26753.25.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 21:05 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > OK, I went and took on a few orphaned packages, namely autotrace, > gtranslator, t1lib, t1utils, and ttf2pt1. Will start with gcc 4.1 > testing and existing bugs. > > Just to let everyone know. There's a new version of t1lib There's a bugzilla about it including a small patch to the makefile (though it is possible there's a newer version since then) From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 18:14:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:14:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161814.k0GIEGNJ014716@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |katzj at redhat.com BugsThisDependsOn| |176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 13:14 EST ------- I see itext has been posted for review, but no one has set it to FE-REVIEW yet. I presume katzj at redhat.com is still on this or should i take it over to allow this package to complete too? Adding depends for itext bug to this 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 18:23:00 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:23:00 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137434366.3612.31.camel@localhost> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137426012.2801.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137434366.3612.31.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <1137435780.2801.93.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 09:59 -0800 schrieb Toshio Kuratomi: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 16:40 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 00:55 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > And what do we do with orphaned packages? > > > Kick them. BTW, "kick them" is now in the proposal at: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MassRebuildFC5 > >> Unless they have been touched by an active FE contributor post > > > FC-4. There have been a few packages already, which do rebuild, but don't > > > work or don't even install without errors. We do the community a disservice > > > if we offer packages, which bear the risk of either being out-of-date or > > > not-working. > > > > That okay for everybody? Or are there people around that want to build a > > orphaned-packages-task-force that looks at the stuff? > > Unfortunately, there's nothing that can help an orphaned package except > to be adopted. Okay, agreed. > Someone has to commit to fixing the package if it breaks > or has security holes through the FC release cycle. [...] This directly leads to another problem: We either need to drop all orphaned packages at the point where the maintainer steps down *or* we need a orphaned-packages-task-force that maintains orphaned packages in the trees where they were shipped (example: if foo was shipped in extras/4 and is orphaned now we either remove it now or somebody has to maintain it from now on until FC4 is EOL) -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 18:23:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:23:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161823.k0GINKKA016081@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 13:23 EST ------- Umm in comment #8 the line wrapping went a bit crazy (charset confusion?), few corrections: About files section should read: %{_datadir}/icons/* %{_datadir}/pixmaps/* %{_datadir}/applications/* And about %post/postrun should read: %post -p %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db %postrun -p %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db Additional note i missed in the previous post): %clean section should read (according to FE standards): 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 jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Jan 16 18:28:07 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:28:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <33446.129.42.161.36.1137436087.squirrel@jdub.homelinux.org> > Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 16:13 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: >> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: >> > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=FE5Target > > We probably should have some more: > > FE5Target-x86-64 > FE5Target-ppc > FE5Target-orphaned Agreed. >> > > 2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. > > /me wonders how to create more then 1300 bugs Well _that_ would have to be scripted. :) > >> > > 3) Maintainers rebuild their packages, fixing issues as they >> encounter >> > > them. >> > > 4) Close the bugs as they are completed. >> > >> > And what happens if maintainers fail to kick off rebuilds? Or there >> >> We'd be able to tell because their bugs would still be open. That would >> allow others to help out in those situations. > > I just added the question > > What happens if a package has a official maintainer, but does not > rebuild his packages in (let's say) 10 days after the official mass > rebuild was proclaimed? > > to > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MassRebuildFC5 Another developer steps in and does it, pointing back to the bug comment they made stating why. > >> > some sort of cascade such that an underlying dependancy package needs >> > to be rebuilt at the same time as another package but package A and >> > package B are maintained by different people? >> >> Bugzilla has fields to allow this. Package maintainers should know what >> their packages depend on. Mark package B's bug as being blocked by A's. > > That's going to be fun. I suspect that won't work, but maybe I'm wrong. To clarify, I see this as a manual step each maintainer _could_ do. A maintainer needs to know what their packages depend on. If they want to indicate that in bugzilla, it's possible. >> Seriously, if we can get a few people to help drive and work through a >> mass rebuild then I'm all for it. I'll even help. But I still think it >> should be tracked in bugzilla whether or not a single person is doing it >> or each maintainer. That way, if changes _are_ needed and a maintainer >> is MIA for some reason, we at least have some history of what happened >> and where the problems were. > > If the solution is found how to create all those bugs for all packages > it might work. > > Another idea: Tell everybody to rebuild. Wait a week. Fill bugs for all > packages that dind't get rebuild. Wait a week. If the maintainers didn't > do anything in between it can be rebuild by a special mass rebuild task > force. If it fails - fix it or drop it before FC5. That would work too. Less overhead, but less tracking too. As others have said though, just rebuilding doesn't always help things. In some cases, a rebuild will succeed but the package will fail to work. In other cases, it would be a waste of time if the maintainer was planning on doing an update anyway [1]. For the cases where nobody rebuilds, then sure a special mass rebuild might work. In both proposals though, I think it would be good to have a couple people try to really drive this thing. Whether it be doing the automated mass rebuild, or herding the cats^H^H^H^H maintainers through it. josh [1] Unless we are talking about a _freeze_ of FE5. To my knowledge we aren't, so an update in the middle of all this is perfectly possible as FE is a rolling release. From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 16 18:33:51 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:33:51 +0100 Subject: [Bug 177862] nautilus-sendto was added to Core in development but still exists in extras development In-Reply-To: <1137435313.15396.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200601160009.k0G09j7e008296@www.beta.redhat.com> <1137435313.15396.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137436431.2801.96.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 13:15 -0500 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:09 -0500, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > > ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-15 19:09 EST ------- > > nautilus-sendto*.rpm has been removed from the Fedora Extras development > > repository. repoview pages about it will be gone with the next push, too. > > > > The request for removal of the devel branch directory in CVS has very low > > priority. For ordinary removal within CVS, "cvs remove" is sufficient. > > The page in the Wiki is mostly used for operations which need admin > > privileges (or which ought not be done by normal users). > > Thanks for the clarification. I've added this as a note on the wiki. Paul, could you do me a favour and add it to http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq ? tia! -- Thorsten Leemhuis From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Mon Jan 16 18:34:25 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:04:25 +0330 Subject: taking on a few orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137435460.26753.25.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137435460.26753.25.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137436465.3046.26.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 10:17 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > There's a new version of t1lib > There's a bugzilla about it including a small patch to the makefile > (though it is possible there's a newer version since then) I know. I assigned the bug to myself. But I'm doing the others first, to see how it goes. BTW, the build system appears to be stuck again. My autotrace job (2940) has stopped in the prep stage. roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 18:54:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:54:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177944] New: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices 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=177944 Summary: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/alsamixergui.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.1.rc1.src.rpm Description: alsamixergui is a FLTK based frontend for alsamixer. It is written directly on top of the alsamixer source, leaving the original source intact, only adding a couple of ifdefs, and some calls to the gui part, so it provides exactly the same functionality, but with a graphical userinterface. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 19:01:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:01:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161901.k0GJ1D3l021871@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-16 14:01 EST ------- Again, if you include trac.fgci, also take care of it in trac.conf (see comments 8 and 11). Please include something like this (note also the "better" commented out default paths) as trac.conf in that case: # Replace all occurrences of /srv/trac with your trac root below # and uncomment the respective SetEnv and PythonOption directives. #SetEnv TRAC_ENV /srv/trac SetHandler mod_python PythonHandler trac.web.modpython_frontend #PythonOption TracEnv /srv/trac -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 19:06:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:06:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] New: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap 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=177946 Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xkeycaps.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xkeycaps-2.46-1.src.rpm Description: xkeycaps is a graphical front-end to xmodmap. It opens a window that looks like a keyboard; moving the mouse over a key shows what KeySyms and Modifier bits that key generates. Clicking on a key simulates KeyPress/KeyRelease events on the window of your choice. It is possible to change the KeySyms and Modifiers generated by a key through a mouse-based interface. This program can also write an input file for xmodmap to recreate your changes in future sessions. NOTE TO REVIEWERS: This spec and SRPM are for FC-5 (modular X). If you are testing this on an older build of Fedora Core, you can replace all of the BuildRequires in the spec with "xorg-x11-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 ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Jan 16 19:15:12 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:15:12 +0200 Subject: taking on a few orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137438912.28950.61.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 21:05 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > OK, I went and took on a few orphaned packages, namely autotrace, > gtranslator, t1lib, t1utils, and ttf2pt1. Please update http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 19:23:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:23:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177944] Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161923.k0GJNfLX025615@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177944 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 14:23 EST ------- I'll pick it up, doing build & mock as we speak, changing blocker to FE-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 Mon Jan 16 19:34:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:34:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161934.k0GJYfmg028086@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-16 14:34 EST ------- As you've noted, the sample configurations provided under /usr/share/doc are for a not-particularly-useful sample service. The sample script (usr/lib/oddjob/oddjob-sample.sh) is configured for oddjobd (etc/oddjobd.conf.d/oddjobd-sample.conf) and the system-wide copy of D-BUS (etc/dbus-1/system.d/oddjob-sample.conf). (Uncovered a bug in the default sample here, fixed it in 0.22). After installation of these files, a restart of both the messagebus and oddjobd services will be required to make both daemons reread their respective configurations. That done, a client can invoke the service using either: oddjob_request -s com.redhat.oddjob.sample -o /com/redhat/oddjob/sample -i com.redhat.oddjob.sample sample or, using the more standard D-BUS client tool: dbus-send --system --print-reply --dest=com.redhat.oddjob.sample /com/redhat/oddjob/sample com.redhat.oddjob.sample.sample The script indicated in the configuration will be run with superuser privileges, and the client will receive its exit status and whatever it output to stdout and stderr. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 19:43:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:43:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177944] Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161943.k0GJhMli030100@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177944 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 14:43 EST ------- Compiled cleanly & functions on FC5-devel One functional comment: There is no quit button (other then window titlebar [X] one), not really an HIG compliant application, but functional otherwise. Missing for formal checklist (from PackageReviewGuidelines): "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 PackagingGuidelines. 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." Review list MUST items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (BSD-ish?) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed Review list SHOULD items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires rpmlint has no complaints at all (no output) Please add a desktop file, or explanation why not in the spec file, and i'll do the reviewlist 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 19:43:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:43:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161943.k0GJhlBH030245@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-16 14:43 EST ------- I don't see any blockers left. The comments in #13 seem to be based on a diffrent .spec file. Paul, if you could look again based on the spec in comment #10, that would be great. I don't like the lsb subpackage, but I don't see any technical grounds for that being a blocker. I wouldn't do things that way, but the package does work and meet the package guidelines. I'll give a day or two for any additional comments, and then approve if no blockers come 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 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Mon Jan 16 19:52:03 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:52:03 +0100 Subject: Package foo enqueued. (However, no Job ID was provided in the time required) Message-ID: <43CBF963.1040108@laposte.net> Methinks it's time to do some kicking -- Nicolas Mailhot From sundaram at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 19:59:36 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:29:36 +0530 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages In-Reply-To: References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43CBFB28.1080304@redhat.com> Hi >A start would be to run repoview on FC, which I logged over 6 months >ago... > >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/161901 > >In terms of minimizing spam/feedback, why not have repoview (or >whatever we use) generate a link to bugzilla (with the correct >component/version prefilled) on each package page. > > > That bug is not being ignored. I have been reminding the right people to get this done. It will probably be done within a few weeks. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 19:57:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:57:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601161957.k0GJvCjR032620@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 will at netmindz.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |will at netmindz.net ------- Additional Comments From will at netmindz.net 2006-01-16 14:56 EST ------- I know this isn't strictly related to this package, but has anyone got the kmod_package() macro to work on rhel4 ? It just complains about it being empty -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 20:01:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:01:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162001.k0GK1G2r000873@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-16 15:01 EST ------- Spec file and SRPM updated (0.9.3-4): - updated trac.conf to allow for trac.*cgi Spec Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/trac/trac-0.9.3-4.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 Jan 16 20:04:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:04:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162004.k0GK4sv5001571@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 15:04 EST ------- Compiled cleanly & functions on FC5-devel Missing: .desktop file (Required by PackageReviewGuidelines) or explanation why Missing: (copied from upstream or in package included) licence file, however there is a copyright mentioned in the manpage, not sure if this is 'good enough', will trust packager's judgement on this Review list MUST items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (BSD-ish?) is fedora extra's compatible - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed Review list SHOULD items: - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires rpmlint has no complaints at all (no output) & mock build cleanly (fc-devel-i386) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 16 20:09:13 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:09:13 -0500 Subject: taking on a few orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137436465.3046.26.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1137432902.3046.21.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137435460.26753.25.camel@locolhost.localdomain> <1137436465.3046.26.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1137442153.19719.20.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 22:04 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 10:17 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > > There's a new version of t1lib > > There's a bugzilla about it including a small patch to the makefile > > (though it is possible there's a newer version since then) > > I know. I assigned the bug to myself. But I'm doing the others first, to > see how it goes. > > BTW, the build system appears to be stuck again. My autotrace job (2940) > has stopped in the prep stage. buildsys has been kicked. -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 20:09:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:09:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162009.k0GK9mwT002250@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 green at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 15:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > I'll pick this one up for review. Thanks! I've made all your requested changes and more... Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-7.src.rpm In addition to your suggestions, I've fixed the doc and .jar file installation locations (from /usr/share/rssowl to /usr/share/doc/rssowl-1.2 and /usr/share/java). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 20:10:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:10:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162010.k0GKAmUF002551@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 15:10 EST ------- Woops mock did end up complaining there are missing build requires: libXt-devel xorg-x11-proto-devel Please add those to BR -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 20:22:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:22:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162022.k0GKMHDK004712@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-16 15:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > I'll keep updating my packages as the proposal evolves, but I really hope that > something comes together soon. Jeffrey, feel free to update to something that is similar to the packages referred in this mail: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-January/msg00873.html This is the direction we'll probaly take (but don't delete the current versions -- just in case) Please tell me about any problems you hit with this new scheme (private mail or directly to the list please). 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 20:26:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:26:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162026.k0GKQn3o005682@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL|http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdeg|http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdeg |oede/Glide3-libGL-6.2.1- |oede/Glide3-libGL-6.2.1- |2.src.rpm |3.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-16 15:26 EST ------- Glide3 which is a hard requirement for this package has the same ExclusiveArchs (also inherited from Core) I do believe that there we're macs with voodoo's. Atleast the Glide code is full of mac defines, unfortunatly only for the metroworks compiler, so the chances of getting it work on mac-linux are small and this is an impossible job with a mac. Anyone care to donate me a PPC machine? So for the near future no PPC version of Glide3 and thus no PPC version of this package. I've put an SRPM and spec with fixed license at: Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/Glide3-libGL.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/Glide3-libGL-6.2.1-3.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 Mon Jan 16 20:35:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:35:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162035.k0GKZn2J007523@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andreas.bierfert at lowlatency. | |de ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-16 15:35 EST ------- Well, it's available for FE4 and FE3, at least: http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/repoview/wmweather+-0-2.9-2.fc4.html http://fedoraproject.org/extras/3/i386/repodata/repoview/wmweather+-0-2.9-2.fc3.html w3c-libwww apparently was dropped from Fedora Core after FC4, so possibly that's the reason why wmeather+ has not been built for FE development before. Anyway, CCing Andreas. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 20:43:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:43:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162043.k0GKhbIr009104@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-16 15:43 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > Glide3 which is a hard requirement for this package has the same ExclusiveArchs > (also inherited from Core) I do believe that there we're macs with voodoo's. > Atleast the Glide code is full of mac defines, unfortunatly only for the > metroworks compiler, so the chances of getting it work on mac-linux are small > and this is an impossible job with a mac. Anyone care to donate me a PPC machine? I don't believe the VooDoo's in macs worked the same way they did on PC's. On my iMac, anyway - the VooDoo2 only was used for 3D acceleration - using the built in ATI chipset for all things 2D - and was never supported in Linux. I suppose it is possible that some of the PCI voodoo2 cards worked differently, but Fedora only supports new world macs, which I believe had believe (with exception of iMac) had better built in 3D than the VooDoo2. I know you can install Fedora on old world macs that use BootX - so if the PCI VooDoo2 cards did ever work in Linux, it might be worth it - but I honestly don't know that they ever did. I think they were pass through acceleration for 3D only, and that 2D was still handled by the built in video. I might be wrong 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 Mon Jan 16 20:44:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:44:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162044.k0GKiCGS009262@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 15:44 EST ------- Ok all the items from my checklist have been fixed However one thing i overlooked unfortunatly because it was hidden in the sources list is the .desktop file (Source2) is missing the fedora vendor, and the X-Fedora category. Its supposed to be installed using desktop-file-utils: desktop-file-install --vendor fedora \ --dir ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications \ --add-category X-Fedora \ %{SOURCE2} And in the %files section remeber the file will now be called: fedora-rssowl.desktop And add "BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils" please More info here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#desktop Please fix that one last remaining issue and we are ready for 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 Mon Jan 16 20:51:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:51:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162051.k0GKpefr010580@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-16 15:51 EST ------- Good catches. The source doesn't include any license text, and the license is derived from the documentation and source code, so there will not be any text in %doc. -2 has all the above issues resolved: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xkeycaps-2.46-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/xkeycaps.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 Mon Jan 16 20:53:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:53:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162053.k0GKrTNX010839@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 15:53 EST ------- Final official review: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint output: W: Glide3-libGL invalid-license MIT/X11 But this is ignorable, licence is compatible, it just doesn't recognise it - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (MIT/X11) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section (only ships basic so & shell script) - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed (3d programs use standard libGL for -devel files) - Proper directory-ownerships Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (licence.html) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires FE-ACCEPTED Hans please assign the bug to me, i don't have fedorabugs group access to do so yet, import, make tag && make build and close this bug with NEXTRELEASE please. Congrats on _finally_ getting it in after 3 months :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 20:55:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:55:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162055.k0GKtMZR011131@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-16 15:55 EST ------- Looks good 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 21:01:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:01:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162101.k0GL1w3k012225@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 16:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12) > Ok all the items from my checklist have been fixed > > However one thing i overlooked unfortunatly because it was hidden in the sources > list is the .desktop file (Source2) is missing the fedora vendor, and the > X-Fedora category. Its supposed to be installed using desktop-file-utils: Fixed, thanks. Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/rssowl-1.2-8.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 Jan 16 21:02:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:02:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177944] Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162102.k0GL2hSZ012401@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177944 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-16 16:02 EST ------- The app certainly isn't HIG compliant, but it dates back to 2002. There are certainly tons of other mixers which are HIG complaint, so I'm content to leave this application as is. Added a desktop file in -2: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.2.rc1.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/alsamixergui.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 icon at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 16 21:12:49 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:12:49 -0500 Subject: a better webinterface to our packages In-Reply-To: <43CBFB28.1080304@redhat.com> References: <1137249425.5167.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137250013.30150.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137251465.8042.17.camel@cutter> <1137313714.3469.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43CA3506.1020202@lowlatency.de> <43CA3767.7010308@redhat.com> <43CBFB28.1080304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43CC0C51.5000301@fedoraproject.org> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > That bug is not being ignored. I have been reminding the right people to > get this done. It will probably be done within a few weeks. My understanding is that the infrastructure serving FC packages is a bit older than is required by repoview -- i.e. older versions of python and friends. This isn't a problem of just someone being too lazy to run "rpm -Uvh" -- it requires some significant effort, so it's understandable why this isn't immediately addressed. -- Konstantin Ryabitsev McGill University WSG Montr?al, Qu?bec From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 21:18:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:18:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162118.k0GLIbqK014979@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 16:18 EST ------- Thanks v2 looks good, formal reviewlist: Review list MUST items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (BSD-ish?) is fedora extra's compatible, included in 'man xkeycaps' - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - Includes desktop file, BR desktop-file-utils, installs using desktop-file-install w/ proper vendor/category Review list SHOULD items: - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires rpmlint has no complaints at all (no output) However mock failed again; It has a missing libXext-devel BR. Please if you have a faster machine then my notebook try mockbuilds your self too to make sure your including all BR's properly? :-) After adding that BR, rpmbuild -bs and a new mock build everything is peachy perfect again. FE-APPROVED but based on the assumption you will add that BR before commiting to CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 21:19:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:19:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162119.k0GLJqN1015220@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 16:19 EST ------- Ps please assign bug to me according to process docs, i haven't been processed for fedorabugs yet so i can't 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 21:24:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:24:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162124.k0GLOD2g016100@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-16 16:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > I know this isn't strictly related to this package, but has anyone got the > kmod_package() macro to work on rhel4 ? See comment 12. Additionally, not really tested, but the whole current kernel module packaging proposal doesn't work as-is on RHEL4 because 1) its non-UP kernel-*-devel packages do not provide kernel-devel-$arch = $kver$kvariant, and 2) they lack the $uname_r-$arch formatted symlink in /usr/src/kernels. But I think the proposal can be fine tuned at least to work better in it without losing anything though. Will look into it and post results to extras list, stay tuned. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 16 21:37:42 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:37:42 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137432648.2801.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137230211.3621.57.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1137243484.4321.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137273436.22283.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137432648.2801.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137447462.28950.89.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Will we > ship /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/kmodtool in the package "rpm-build" or do we > plan to ship it in a separate package and let rpm-build depend on it? I > would prefer the latter -- this way updates would be a lot easier, > especially now that the script and the standard is still quite new. The initial plan was to ship the module helper macros/whatever in redhat-rpm-config; that would still work for me. rpm-build sounds somewhat heavyweight. In any case, I think there should be a macro pointing at it and kmod packages wouldn't have to care about the path; they'd just use eg. %{kmodtool}. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 21:47:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:47:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162147.k0GLl9XX021184@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 16:47 EST ------- Formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - Proper directory-ownerships - Proper desktop file & install Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires Only thing i could not verify of the SHOULD list is the mock build, can't build this in mock without itext being in extras-development, or to much effort setting up a local repo to verify, but it looks like it will, so: FE-ACCEPTED Thanks for the great & quick work! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 21:51:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:51:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162151.k0GLp7rK022154@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-16 16:50 EST ------- Thanks for explanation. --enable-final has caused this errors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 21:54:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:54:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177944] Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162154.k0GLsPfe022787@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsamixergui : GUI mixer for ALSA sound devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177944 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 16:54 EST ------- Review list MUST items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (BSD-ish?) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - Missing BR: desktop-file-utils, mock failed because of it. With adding that BR, it mock builds properly. - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed Review list SHOULD items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires FE-ACCEPT, but under the assumption you will add that BR for desktop-file-utils before commiting to cvs! Please assign the bug to me on closing it per procedure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 22:03:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:03:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162203.k0GM3Cfr024250@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992 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 2006-01-16 17:03 EST ------- Imported & Build, 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 Mon Jan 16 22:04:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:04:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162204.k0GM483T024678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |kevin at tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-16 17:03 EST ------- Here's a review: ok MUST items: ok - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec ok - MUST: The package must be named according to the PackageNamingGuidelines. ok - MUST: The package must meet the PackagingGuidelines. ok - MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible license... GPL, good. 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 License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. ok - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. ok - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. ok - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source 3c57cd11aba49fe05f77709cd9a7d609 byzanz-0.0.3.tar.gz ok - MUST: A package must not contain any BuildRequires that are listed in the exceptions section of PackagingGuidelines. ok - MUST: All other Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. ok - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. ok - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. ok - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. ok - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}... ok - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros... ok - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. ok - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application.... ok - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Builds ok under devel. Doesn't build on fc4 due to modular X and unavailable gnome packages, I assume it's just targeted at devel and beyond. NEEDINFO MUST items: 1 - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. filesystem package owns /usr/libexec. I guess it's safe to assume filesystem is installed, but perhaps it should have a explicit requires for it? 2 - 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 PackagingGuidelines. 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. Should this package have a .desktop file since it's got a applet? 3 - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. Some rpmlint output: W: byzanz summary-ended-with-dot A desktop recorder. Should remove . on the end of summary. W: byzanz non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec I guess this can be ignored, but see note 1 above. SHOULD Items: ok - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. 4 - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. I only have a x86 test box. I assume it will build ok on other arches. 5 - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. ... I am getting a segfault when I run the application on my devel test machine. I was running inside a vnc session, but tried both Xfce and gnome. (I don't have a monitor on my test box right at the moment). Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. [Switching to Thread -1211094112 (LWP 23477)] 0x0804d966 in gifenc_quantize_image ( data=0xb7301800 "I\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\t"..., width=1024, height=768, bpp=2, rowstride=2048, alpha=1, byte_order=1234, max_colors=255) at quantize.c:383 383 GIFENC_READ_TRIPLET (color, row); (gdb) where #0 0x0804d966 in gifenc_quantize_image ( data=0xb7301800 "I\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\tI\t"..., width=1024, height=768, bpp=2, rowstride=2048, alpha=1, byte_order=1234, max_colors=255) at quantize.c:383 #1 0x0804bb62 in byzanz_recorder_run_encoder (data=0x8253ed0) at byzanzrecorder.c:442 #2 0x0070f2a4 in g_thread_create_full () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 #3 0x009bf262 in start_thread () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #4 0x0062c14e in clone () from /lib/libc.so.6 Let me know if I can provide any more information on tracking the segfault down. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mgarski at post.pl Mon Jan 16 22:08:33 2006 From: mgarski at post.pl (Marcin Garski) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:08:33 +0100 Subject: Libtool files (.la) problem Message-ID: <43CC1961.7070004@post.pl> Hello, I've recently recompiled digikam package in FE devel tree and something went wrong: grep: /usr/lib/libltdl.la: No such file or directory /bin/sed: can't read /usr/lib/libltdl.la: No such file or directory libtool: link: `/usr/lib/libltdl.la' is not a valid libtool archive make[4]: *** [libsetup.la] Error 1 Several weeks ago the same package has compiled without errors, so probably things in devel tree has changed. Should I add libtool-ltdl-devel (it include libltdl.la) to BR, or maybe *.la files in /usr/lib/ should be fixed (I don't know which packages provide .la file which reffer to libltdl.la, because I don't have access to rawhide)? -- Marcin Garski From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 22:05:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:05:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162205.k0GM5XGn025119@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 17:05 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > I see itext has been posted for review, but no one has set it to FE-REVIEW yet. > I presume katzj at redhat.com is still on this or should i take it over to allow > this package to complete too? Please take over if you don't mind. I think the only reason katzj started reviewing it is because he felt bad for me. :-) Thanks, AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Mon Jan 16 22:17:20 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:17:20 -0500 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: <200601161712.k0GHC3A2012049@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601161712.k0GHC3A2012049@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1137449841.19719.28.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:12 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > > b/c it is not using the group tag to sort the packages but the current > > content of the comps.xml file in the extras repository. > > Ok. Is it a file I can somehow update ? > > I can't seem to be able to find it in CVS... I think I have all the packages > locally. Can you tell me the name of the module I need to checkout ? > no, it's not immediately modifiable and I know there's been some continuing flux on how we should let people modify it. Thorsten, can you put this back on the agenda to look at? -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 16 22:33:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:33:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173295] Review Request: python-4Suite-XML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162233.k0GMXSaJ001504@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-4Suite-XML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173295 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-16 17:33 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12) > - I can't find any file or directory called "*profile*" in the built directory, > have I missed anything? > The tarball 4Suite-1.0b3/profile/ files don't look useful: > a) upstream doesn't install them, why should we? > b) at least profile_all.py references "create_document.py" and other test files > which are not present in the tarball Interesting. Something in my environment must've caused the install script to create the dir. Oh well, not an big deal. > - the test suite fails, so it would just clutter the logs and new failures would > be hidden among the "regular" failures. The test suite was failing in all > 4Suite releases I have ever packaged, IIRC. Alright, I won't consider this a blocker then. 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 Jan 16 22:43:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:43:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162243.k0GMhHAJ004468@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 17:43 EST ------- Picking this one up on green's request, changing to FE-REVIEW. Green please assign the bug to me? rpmlint on the itext packages shows: W: itext non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java W: itext-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation W: itext-manual non-standard-group Development/Documentation Please pick one of FE's standard groups: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups Development/Libraries and Documentation seem to be the proper 2 to choose W: itext-manual invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL W: itext invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL W: itext-javadoc invalid-license Mozilla Public License & LGPL Ignorable error,licence is valid and fedora compatible W: itext incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:1.3-1jpp_3fc 1.3-1jpp_3 Please correct this, versions have to be the same, please remove the 'fc' part from the changelog W: itext-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%post rm %post javadoc does confuse me, the scripplet: rm -f %{_javadocdir}/%{name} ln -s %{name}-%{version} %{_javadocdir}/%{name} What are you trying to do here, isn't there a way to get the file locations correct in the %install without doing dangerous rm's and confusing links (with then not-owned) to directories? On removing this package this will result into a dead link W: itext wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/lgpl.txt W: itext wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/MPL-1.1.txt W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/lgpl.txt W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/build.xml W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/MPL-1.1.txt W: itext-manual hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/download.xml W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/site.xml E: itext-manual standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/doc W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/release.xml W: itext-manual wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/compile.xml This is the same error as in rssowl, please add dos2unix to the BuildRequirements, and dos2unix them in the %install section. I agree with katz that the jpp in the version is not elegant, but looking at the standard FC development repo, it seems all java packages/libraries suffer from this, so i guess its consitent in its own way :-) Identation of the header part seems very confusing, your mixing tabs and spaces i think, and my tabsize (4) is probably not the same as yours, please use spaces instead of tabs, it avoids such confusion. Would it maybe be an idea to combine the javadoc and manual packages? Normally documentation is in the -devel package, but seeing how this has none thats not an option. However having 2 'doc' packages seems a bit to much to me (but i have no inside knowledge of these docs, so if there are very good reasons then thats acceptable, but please put them in a comment in the specfile please) I'll post the whole formal review list once these issues are addressed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 22:56:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162256.k0GMuxe2006561@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-16 17:56 EST ------- Yes, sometime ago I wanted to rebuild for devel (see http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?email=andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de&uid=1287) and saw that w3c-libwww was missing but forgot about it and putting up w3c-libwww for fe inclusion... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 16 23:17:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:17:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162317.k0GNHRlr009708@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 Nicolas.Mailhot at laPoste.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From Nicolas.Mailhot at laPoste.net 2006-01-16 18:17 EST ------- And while I'm a it, I've updated perl-Convert-UUlib too (still happily running Steve's original package 24h/24 7j/j since last september at least without any hitch - can't anyone 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 Jan 16 23:48:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:48:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601162348.k0GNmaZ9015251@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From katzj at redhat.com 2006-01-16 18:48 EST ------- Chris -- feel free to take it over. I mostly wanted to start the ball rolling and had a few upfront questions. I was hoping to get back to it the end of last week, but getting test2 out took more effort than I was expecting and I'm at a conference this week, so doubt I would get back to looking until next week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 00:39:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:39:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170039.k0H0dQ2g023387@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 19:39 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Picking this one up on green's request, changing to FE-REVIEW. Green please > assign the bug to me? Done. New versions of the files are here: Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext-1.3-1jpp_4.src.rpm > W: itext-javadoc dangerous-command-in-%post rm > %post javadoc does confuse me, the scripplet: > rm -f %{_javadocdir}/%{name} > > ln -s %{name}-%{version} %{_javadocdir}/%{name} > > What are you trying to do here, isn't there a way to get the file locations > correct in the %install without doing dangerous rm's and confusing links (with > then not-owned) to directories? On removing this package this will result into a > dead link This was copied from the JPackage version of this package. I just removed the unversioned directory to avoid this whole problem. > Would it maybe be an idea to combine the javadoc and manual packages? Normally > documentation is in the -devel package, but seeing how this has none thats not > an option. However having 2 'doc' packages seems a bit to much to me (but i have > no inside knowledge of these docs, so if there are very good reasons then thats > acceptable, but please put them in a comment in the specfile please) I'm not sure if there is a good reason. This is just standard practice for JPackage packages. javadoc always goes in its own package. Thanks! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 01:07:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:07:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170107.k0H17A8t026767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 20:07 EST ------- Is it still worth having the %define section free in the spec file? Or is it there to keep it as close to the JPackage one as possible? Kind of looks out of place there :-) Licence is often written as 'MPL' and not fully "Mozilla Public Licence" (just as GPL/BSD/LGPL etc are written shorthand), mozilla its self uses MPL too so i think thats the example to follow, also by examples of other packages i think the proper format would be: MPL/LGPL Still one inconsitent version in the changelog according to rpmlint: W: itext incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:1.3-1jpp_4 1.3-1jpp_4 rpmlint Group warnings: W: itext-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation W: itext-manual non-standard-group Development/Documentation Its either Development/Libraries, or "Documentation", Development/Documentation unfortunatly doesn't exist. Please use "Documenation" for the 2 sub packages with the docs. other rpmlint warning: W: itext-manual hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties But this is ignorable The package also owns / inclues: /usr/share/java/itext But this is an empty directory .. is there any reason for its being there? If not please remove review list so far: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (MPL/LGPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section (but empty dir present/owned) - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed (though using javadoc/manual packages there not devel packages with .a/.so/.h files) - No directory-ownerships needed - No gui app, so no need for a desktop file Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file (MPL-1.1.txt and lgpl.txt) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires I'm running a mock build to verify in the meantime, but that will take a few more minutes to complete. Meantime please address the above mentioned issues and we'll be very close to 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 Tue Jan 17 01:20:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170120.k0H1KbWm028145@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 20:20 EST ------- Mock build unfortunatly failed, i think there's a build requires missing that causes javadoc to become upset. RPM building fails on: + mkdir -p /var/tmp/itext-1.3-1jpp_4-root-mockbuild/usr/share/javadoc/itext-1.3 + cp -pr 'build/docs/*' /var/tmp/itext-1.3-1jpp_4-root-mockbuild/usr/share/javadoc/itext-1.3 cp: cannot stat `build/docs/*': No such file or directory Looking at the (huge) build log what jumps out is: [javadoc] WARNING: Cannot locate class java.io.IOException referenced in class com.lowagie.bc.asn1.DERU Well and this goes on and on .. i've made a text file from the log with only the javadoc build errors (missing-classes.txt) with: cat build.log |grep "WARNING: Cannot locate class" > missing-classes.txt which i will attach together with the complete mock build log. These will be have to addressed before i can approve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 01:35:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:35:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170135.k0H1ZccT030588@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 20:35 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Looking at the (huge) build log what jumps out is: > [javadoc] WARNING: Cannot locate class java.io.IOException referenced in class > com.lowagie.bc.asn1.DERU > > Well and this goes on and on .. i've made a text file from the log with only the > javadoc build errors (missing-classes.txt) with: This is normal. I'm trying to figure out what the real problems is right now. AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 01:40:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:40:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170140.k0H1ec1F031621@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 20:40 EST ------- Looking at the build logs there's also a part with HTTP connections and exceptions, or so it seems, at this part: [javadoc] java.lang.NullPointerException [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at java.net.Socket.connect (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at java.net.Socket.connect (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.protocol.http.HTTPConnection.getSocket (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.protocol.http.HTTPConnection.getOutputStream (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.protocol.http.Request.dispatch (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.protocol.http.HTTPURLConnection.connect (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.java.net.protocol.http.HTTPURLConnection.getInputStream (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at java.net.URL.openStream (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.doclets.htmldoclet.ExternalDocSet.load (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.doclets.htmldoclet.HtmlDoclet.run (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.doclets.AbstractDoclet.startInstance (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.doclets.AbstractDoclet.start (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke (libgcj.so.7) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.gjdoc.Main.startDoclet (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.gjdoc.Main.start (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) [javadoc] at gnu.classpath.tools.gjdoc.Main.main (lib-gnu-classpath-tools-gjdoc.so.0) Maybe thats related? Anyhow no rush i think i'm calling it a night, will take a look at your fixing results in about 9 hours during my first cup of coffee :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Tue Jan 17 01:47:47 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:47:47 -0500 Subject: [pysqlite 2.1.0] installation fails without `--old-and-unmanageable' option In-Reply-To: <1137416556.19421.12.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <43CB92CB.7020404@fedora.pl> <1137416556.19421.12.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1137462467.26538.13.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 08:02 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 13:34 +0100, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > > You can use this package for testing ? > > http://student.agh.edu.pl/~pmalina/fedora_extras/python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1.src.rpm > > I'll take a look at the issue tonight if I can. No luck finding what the issue was, but... > > Is this a bug in pysqlite2? May I temporarily use > > `--old-and-unmanageable' option? > > Your call. There's certainly nothing "wrong" with it per se. > > > BTW Do you know where can I find good documentation about packaging > > python modules? For instance I'm curious why some packages create *.pth > > files (for example python-formencode). > > Now that eggs can be created it's silly to ask developers to add the > path of the egg to every app, hence the .pth file. ...I updated setuptools to 0.6a9 which adds the --single-version-externally-managed switch that provides egg info but obviates the need for a .pth file. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 01:45:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:45:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170145.k0H1joio032594@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-16 20:45 EST ------- Ps i'm not sure about this, just theoretical, but a mock build envirioment does a chroot to a virtual install root, it does mount /proc and devfs, but it won't have any host files, so if it tries to resolve the hostname and connect to it, it would fail .. Anyhow i have no idea how javadoc works, just guessing :-) G'night! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 01:49:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:49:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170149.k0H1nrUP000739@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 20:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > Looking at the build logs there's also a part with HTTP connections and > exceptions, or so it seems, at this part: > Yes, I found this as well. It was the problem. I've added a patch to disable external javadoc links, am rebuilding now. Will post new files in 10min or so. Thanks! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 02:03:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:03:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170203.k0H23siR002302@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-16 21:03 EST ------- New files are here: Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/itext-1.3-1jpp_5.src.rpm (In reply to comment #6) > Is it still worth having the %define section free in the spec file? Or is it > there to keep it as close to the JPackage one as possible? Kind of looks out of > place there :-) I'm trying to make as few changes as possible, and will send those changes I make back to the JPackage maintainer for itext. > Licence is often written as 'MPL' and not fully "Mozilla Public Licence" (just > as GPL/BSD/LGPL etc are written shorthand), mozilla its self uses MPL too so i > think thats the example to follow, also by examples of other packages i think > the proper format would be: MPL/LGPL Ok. > Still one inconsitent version in the changelog according to rpmlint: > W: itext incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:1.3-1jpp_4 1.3-1jpp_4 I can't make this one go away (although now it says _5). > rpmlint Group warnings: > W: itext-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation > W: itext-manual non-standard-group Development/Documentation > Its either Development/Libraries, or "Documentation", Development/Documentation > unfortunatly doesn't exist. Please use "Documenation" for the 2 sub packages > with the docs. Fixed. > other rpmlint warning: > W: itext-manual hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/itext-1.3/ant/.ant.properties > But this is ignorable > > The package also owns / inclues: > /usr/share/java/itext > But this is an empty directory .. is there any reason for its being there? If > not please remove Removed. Thanks! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 redhat.com Tue Jan 17 03:04:38 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 08:34:38 +0530 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <33446.129.42.161.36.1137436087.squirrel@jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <33446.129.42.161.36.1137436087.squirrel@jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <43CC5EC6.3080309@redhat.com> Hi > > > > >>>>>2) Open a rebuild bug for every package in devel and add it to #1. >>>>> >>>>> >>/me wonders how to create more then 1300 bugs >> >> > >Well _that_ would have to be scripted. :) > Talk to RH bugzilla maintainer - dkl at rh -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 03:02:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:02:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177993] New: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile 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=177993 Summary: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at xtdnet.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/fetchlog/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/fetchlog.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/fetchlog/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/fetchlog-1.0-1.src.rpm Description: The fetchlog utility displays the last new messages of a logfile. It is similar like tail (1) but offers some extra functionality for output formatting. To show only the new messages appeared since the last call fetchlog uses a bookmark to remember which messages have been fetched. It is used in combination with nagios and/or snmp to for monitoring syslog events on remote machines, but can also be used as a stand-alone program. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 04:21:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:21:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170421.k0H4Ldtl025724@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-16 23:21 EST ------- Since there are no obvious showstoppers in this bug ticket, I'll review this: Good: - rpmlint checks return: E: amavisd-new non-standard-uid /var/spool/amavisd/db amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-gid /var/spool/amavisd/db amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/amavisd/db 0700 W: amavisd-new dangling-relative-symlink /usr/sbin/clamd.amavisd clamd E: amavisd-new non-standard-uid /var/spool/amavisd amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-gid /var/spool/amavisd amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/amavisd 0700 E: amavisd-new non-standard-uid /var/run/amavisd amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-gid /var/run/amavisd amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-uid /var/spool/amavisd/tmp amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-gid /var/spool/amavisd/tmp amavis E: amavisd-new non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/amavisd/tmp 0700 E: amavisd-new init-script-name-with-dot /etc/rc.d/init.d/clamd.amavisd E: amavisd-new no-status-entry /etc/rc.d/init.d/clamd.amavisd W: amavisd-new no-reload-entry /etc/rc.d/init.d/clamd.amavisd E: amavisd-new subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/clamd.amavisd E: amavisd-new incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/amavisd ${prog_base} I think all of these are safe 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 - 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 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 Jan 17 05:38:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:38:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170538.k0H5cFD6004172@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-17 00:38 EST ------- This is built... but you forgot to set the bug to FE-ACCEPT, so please close this when you do. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Jan 17 05:44:06 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:44:06 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: <1137449841.19719.28.camel@cutter> References: <200601161712.k0GHC3A2012049@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1137449841.19719.28.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1137476646.20280.6.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 17:17 -0500 schrieb seth vidal: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:12 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > > > b/c it is not using the group tag to sort the packages but the current > > > content of the comps.xml file in the extras repository. > > Ok. Is it a file I can somehow update ? > > I can't seem to be able to find it in CVS... I think I have all the packages > > locally. Can you tell me the name of the module I need to checkout ? > > no, it's not immediately modifiable and I know there's been some > continuing flux on how we should let people modify it. > > Thorsten, can you put this back on the agenda to look at? Added -- and it would be helpful for me (and probably other, too) if somebody could add at least a brief overview what is needed in http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/ExtrasCompsXml tia! CU thl From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Jan 17 06:25:56 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:25:56 +0100 Subject: extras-commits-list dead Message-ID: <1137479156.20280.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Hi Sopwith! seem extras-commits-list is dead (not one single mail in the last 11 hours) -- could you take a look what's wrong? tia! CU thl From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 06:35:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:35:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170635.k0H6ZbQM014115@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-17 01:35 EST ------- (In reply to comment #25) > (still happily running Steve's original package 24h/24 7j/j since last september > at least without any hitch - can't anyone approve this?) You know you could have done that yourself, right? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Tue Jan 17 07:15:11 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:15:11 +0200 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs Message-ID: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to maintain in Extras. More info: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 07:53:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 02:53:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178003] New: Review Request: tetex-lambda-jp 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=178003 Summary: Review Request: tetex-lambda-jp Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ryo-dairiki at users.sourceforge.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://proxy.f2.ymdb.yahoofs.jp/users/d1e4801f/bc/tetex-lambda-jp/tetex-lambda-jp.spec?bc7gKzDB8tVlnzY8 SRPM Name or Url: http://proxy.f2.ymdb.yahoofs.jp/users/d1e4801f/bc/tetex-lambda-jp/tetex-lambda-jp-0-4.src.rpm?bc7gKzDB7WeN1Z6E Description: This package is addon packages for lambda(unicoded latex), which is included in the tetex package. We, Japanese need this package to write Japanese TeX document in UTF8. Without this package, we can't render Japanese gryphs properly. Note: This package has some description about dvipdfmx, which has not been included in Fedora Extras yet. This is because MATSUURA Takanori, who are going to be a member of Fedora Extras, will import that package later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 08:25:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:25:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170825.k0H8PE44029039@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From Nicolas.Mailhot at laPoste.net 2006-01-17 03:25 EST ------- Thanks Tom. Ville: I'm not going to approve a perl package which processes insecure data. At least not before taking a few perl tutorials/courses first. You can call me parano?d if you like, but perl is very low in my trust scale, and I don't know it enough to do an educated evaluation. (and yes I'm ready to trust my own data to a package I wouldn't approve - but then I've been running rawhide for more years I care to remember 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 Tue Jan 17 08:39:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:39:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170839.k0H8dIAE032647@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-17 03:39 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > Only thing i could not verify of the SHOULD list is the mock build, can't build > this in mock without itext being in extras-development, or to much effort > setting up a local repo to verify It's actually very easy to set this up; all you need is "createrepo". Just create somewhere to hold your packages (e.g. a mock-built itext package), let's say /var/lib/mock/local # mkdir -p /var/lib/mock/local/RPMS # cp itext*.rpm /var/lib/mock/local/RPMS # cd /var/lib/mock/local # createrepo . Then edit /etc/mock/fedora-development-i386-core.cfg (or whichever config you're using) and add this to the end: [localrepo] name=localrepo baseurl=file:///var/lib/mock/local That should be all you need. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 08:50:15 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:50:15 +0100 Subject: New Fedora Extras Steering Committee chair In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:44:06 +0100." <1137476646.20280.6.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <200601170850.k0H8oFQP021586@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > if somebody could add at least a brief overview what is needed in http:// > www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/ExtrasCompsXml I created the page and put links to what I could find in the fedora-extras-list archives. I'll let other, more knowledgeable people, put more details... :-) Cheers, Christian From paul at city-fan.org Tue Jan 17 08:52:35 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 08:52:35 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137487955.6979.6.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 09:15 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 I volunteer to take bluefish; I already did the last few releases with Phillip Compton's blessing. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 09:51:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 04:51:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177946] Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601170951.k0H9p5VA013319@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xkeycaps : Graphical front end to xmodmap https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177946 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 04:50 EST ------- Woops my bad, set correct blocker bug now and closing to 'NEXTRELEASE" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 10:01:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:01:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171001.k0HA1idU014783@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > > Still one inconsitent version in the changelog according to rpmlint: > > W: itext incoherent-version-in-changelog 0:1.3-1jpp_4 1.3-1jpp_4 > > I can't make this one go away (although now it says _5). Actually the error is in the 0:... part of the version, the 0: is the 'epoch' of the package, however this package doesn't have an Eproch: field so hence the confusion (Epoch == NULL != 0). Epochs in general are evil and to be avoided except in extreme cases (ie only time its worth using is if forinstance you pushed a newer version to the repo's which has a severe corruption error, and can't be fixed in the newer version, then you release a older package with an Epoch: 1 to update over the newer package) Remove the 0: and rpmlint should stop complaining. Building and then mocking the package now, will post the full checklist in a few minutes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 10:03:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:03:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177993] Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171003.k0HA3Pnb014995@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177993 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:03 EST ------- I'll pick this one up, changing to FE-REVIEW (feel free to assign the bug 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 10:20:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:20:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171020.k0HAKUqN017682@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:20 EST ------- rpmlint is now completely quiet, not a single warning or error :-) All the mentioned above issues have been addressed. Formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (MPL/LGPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed (though using javadoc/manual packages there not devel packages with .a/.so/.h files) - No directory-ownerships needed - No gui app, so no need for a desktop file Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file (MPL-1.1.txt and lgpl.txt) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds cleanly now too Great work! FE-APPROVED! When you have cvs-import'ed, make tag && make build this package please close the bug with NEXTRELEASE as resolution (and now you can import rssowl too and do the same for it as soon as this is done building/being pushed to extras-development) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 10:26:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:26:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177993] Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171026.k0HAQgmN018545@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177993 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:26 EST ------- Builds cleanly on fedora-devel-i386 and in mock Spec file does have one miror format inconsitency, we 'always' put the %doc line just below the %defattr line, and not after the binary Also one error in the spec file, the mandir for "man 1 foo" is %{_mandir}/man1/foo and not %{_mandir}/1/foo; In the spec file you have: %install: install -d %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/1 install -m644 %{name}.1 %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/1 %files: %{_mandir}/*/* Should be: %install: install -d %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1 install -m644 %{name}.1 %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1 rpmlint is quiet and has no output. The %install section is missing as first line: rm -rf %{buildroot} Its customary (and according to standards) to include this. Formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list BuildRequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section (but does have a lost manpage) - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - No gui app, so no need for a desktop file Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (LICENSE) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds correctly Please address the above mentioned few minor errors and post a new srpm and i'll do the formal review checklist 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Jan 17 10:37:02 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:37:02 +0100 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060117113702.2cab49b4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:17:52 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Two questions: > > - how was the order ensured when we did the FE4 mass rebuild? Brute-force, I believe. Roughly like this: 0) start with a post-FE3 repository 1) process list of all packages which need a rebuild, one by one 2) drop all entries from the list, which built successfully 3) loop to 1, if at least one package built successfully, else end A big assumption here is that packages fail to build if build dependencies cause breakage at install-time (= package resolver fails to install them) or build-time (= configure scripts or availability tests fail with error condition). From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 10:41:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:41:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171041.k0HAfbwp021375@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > I always keep two different specs for old xorg and modular x. I will upload them > with the next package release. Hi Andreas, i'm still hopefully waiting for new srpm's to test and do the formal review list on. No rush of cource but just so you know my status :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 10:42:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:42:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171042.k0HAgKE5021584@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176780 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 05:42 EST ------- Still awaiting responce from Ignacio, hope your not lost in bugzilla spam and forgot about 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 Tue Jan 17 10:47:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:47:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171047.k0HAlHBR022601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-17 05:47 EST ------- Had a lot of stuff to do at university will get a new srpm out tonight... promise :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 11:40:15 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:40:15 -0800 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137498016.3214.6.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 09:15 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 > > I'd be willing to take firestarter - there's a couple small things in it I was going to file an RFE on that I think I could fix. -=- There also are some tetex packages I saw on the list that I *might* be willing to take (I'll have to look at them and see what they do, and make sure they haven't been incorporated into big tetex) From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 11:47:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:47:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178010] New: Maintainership of Firestarter 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=178010 Summary: Maintainership of Firestarter Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: firestarter AssignedTo: extras-orphan at fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mpeters at mac.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org,fedora-extras- list at redhat.com Description of problem: Firestart orphaned - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages I'd be willing to take 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 Tue Jan 17 11:52:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:52:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178011] New: Maintainership of gnome-themes-extras 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=178011 Summary: Maintainership of gnome-themes-extras Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: gnome-themes-extras AssignedTo: extras-orphan at fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: chabotc at xs4all.nl QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org,fedora-extras- list at redhat.com gnome-themes-extras has been orphaned per: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages I'm willing to take on the maintainership -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 11:54:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:54:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178012] New: Maintainership of themes-backgrounds-gnome 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=178012 Summary: Maintainership of themes-backgrounds-gnome Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: themes-backgrounds-gnome AssignedTo: extras-orphan at fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: chabotc at xs4all.nl QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org,fedora-extras- list at redhat.com themes-backgrounds-gnome has been orphaned per: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages I'm willing to take on the maintainership (there's lots of new goodie backgrounds waiting to be included! :-)) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 17 11:59:53 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:59:53 +0100 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages Message-ID: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> I'd be willing to take over: themes-backgrounds-gnome gnome-themes-extras Recently added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages Opened bugs for these here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 -------------- 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 gajownik at fedora.pl Tue Jan 17 12:01:33 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:01:33 +0100 Subject: [pysqlite 2.1.0] installation fails without `--old-and-unmanageable' option In-Reply-To: <1137462467.26538.13.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <43CB92CB.7020404@fedora.pl> <1137416556.19421.12.camel@ignacio.lan> <1137462467.26538.13.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <43CCDC9D.7080208@fedora.pl> Dnia 01/17/2006 02:48 AM, U?ytkownik Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams napisa?: > No luck finding what the issue was, but... Thanks for trying! > ...I updated setuptools to 0.6a9 which adds the > --single-version-externally-managed switch that provides egg info but > obviates the need for a .pth file. Sweeeet :) -- ^_* From adrian at lisas.de Tue Jan 17 12:12:33 2006 From: adrian at lisas.de (Adrian Reber) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:12:33 +0100 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:59:53PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > I'd be willing to take over: > > themes-backgrounds-gnome > gnome-themes-extras > > Recently added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages > > Opened bugs for these here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 Sorry, if I missed it but since when are bugs opened for change of maintainership? According to the wiki I it didn't change and what I don't understand is: who will work and close these bugs? The only sentence in the wiki about bugzilla is: "open bug reports in bugzilla where package owner's attention is needed." Adrian From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Jan 17 12:25:21 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:25:21 +0100 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> References: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> Message-ID: <20060117132521.59a96d8c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:12:33 +0100, Adrian Reber wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:59:53PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > I'd be willing to take over: > > > > themes-backgrounds-gnome > > gnome-themes-extras > > > > Recently added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages > > > > Opened bugs for these here: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 > > Sorry, if I missed it but since when are bugs opened for change of > maintainership? According to the wiki I it didn't change and what I > don't understand is: who will work and close these bugs? > > The only sentence in the wiki about bugzilla is: > > "open bug reports in bugzilla where package owner's attention is > needed." The full sentence is: "... and join (or re-assign to you) open bug reports in bugzilla where package owner's attention is needed." Which means that somebody, who plans to take over maintainership of a package, ought to query bugzilla for any open tickets and then re-assign them or join Cc. From chabotc at xs4all.nl Tue Jan 17 12:31:37 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:31:37 +0100 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <20060117132521.59a96d8c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> <20060117132521.59a96d8c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137501097.2377.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> I just thought it was a nice way to have a central place for possible discussions, and wanted to search for bug reports and add them as dependencies (turns out there are no open bugs at all :-)) On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:25 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:12:33 +0100, Adrian Reber wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:59:53PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > > I'd be willing to take over: > > > > > > themes-backgrounds-gnome > > > gnome-themes-extras > > > > > > Recently added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages > > > > > > Opened bugs for these here: > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 > > > > Sorry, if I missed it but since when are bugs opened for change of > > maintainership? According to the wiki I it didn't change and what I > > don't understand is: who will work and close these bugs? > > > > The only sentence in the wiki about bugzilla is: > > > > "open bug reports in bugzilla where package owner's attention is > > needed." > > The full sentence is: > > "... and join (or re-assign to you) open bug reports in bugzilla where > package owner's attention is needed." > > Which means that somebody, who plans to take over maintainership > of a package, ought to query bugzilla for any open tickets and then > re-assign them or join Cc. > -------------- 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 Tue Jan 17 12:47:00 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:47:00 +0100 Subject: help needed: Build Error (Job 2982): libgnomedb-1_9_100-4 on ppc Message-ID: <43CCE744.7030800@hhs.nl> Hi all, I decided to walk through all my packages and see if they needed any changes before the big rebuild would happen. As a result of this I've enabled the sharp bindings for libgda (no problem) and libgnomedb (in a seperate subpackage ofcourse). Building libgnomedb with the sharp bindings results in the error below. In the mean time I've requeued it hoping that it was just a bit falling over. Regards, Hans -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Build Error (Job 2982): libgnomedb-1_9_100-4 on fedora-development-extras Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:58:45 -0500 (EST) From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org To: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Job failed on arch ppc Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2982-libgnomedb-1.9.100-4/ ------------------------------------------------- [0xf641d6f0] [0xf68e91fc] [0xf68d6620] [0xf68d5fc4] [0xf68e6fc4] [0xf68d5d58] [0xf68e6ed0] [0xf68e66e4] [0xf68e5fc0] [0xf68e57e8] [0xf755c83c] [0xf755a320] [0xf7754d24] /usr/bin/mono [0x1010099c] /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_invoke+0x1c) [0x1005b6b0] /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_exec_main+0xc8) [0x10060a5c] /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_run_main+0x15c) [0x10061dc8] /usr/bin/mono(mono_jit_exec+0x98) [0x10014230] /usr/bin/mono(mono_main+0x105c) [0x100152a8] /usr/bin/mono [0x10013c40] /lib/libc.so.6 [0xfc20280] /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0x138) [0xfc2048c] make[1]: *** [gnomedb-sharp.dll] Aborted make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/libgnomedb-1.9.100/gnomedb-sharp' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.87504 (%build) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.87504 (%build) From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 17 13:06:50 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:06:50 +0100 Subject: help needed: Build Error (Job 2982): libgnomedb-1_9_100-4 on ppc In-Reply-To: <43CCE744.7030800@hhs.nl> References: <43CCE744.7030800@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <43CCEBEA.9020502@hhs.nl> Never mind, a requeue fixes it fallen bit probably. Regards, Hans Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi all, > > I decided to walk through all my packages and see if they needed any > changes before the big rebuild would happen. As a result of this I've > enabled the sharp bindings for libgda (no problem) and libgnomedb (in a > seperate subpackage ofcourse). > > Building libgnomedb with the sharp bindings results in the error below. > In the mean time I've requeued it hoping that it was just a bit falling > over. > > Regards, > > Hans > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Build Error (Job 2982): libgnomedb-1_9_100-4 on > fedora-development-extras > Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:58:45 -0500 (EST) > From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org > To: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl > > Job failed on arch ppc > > > Build logs may be found at > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2982-libgnomedb-1.9.100-4/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > [0xf641d6f0] > [0xf68e91fc] > [0xf68d6620] > [0xf68d5fc4] > [0xf68e6fc4] > [0xf68d5d58] > [0xf68e6ed0] > [0xf68e66e4] > [0xf68e5fc0] > [0xf68e57e8] > [0xf755c83c] > [0xf755a320] > [0xf7754d24] > /usr/bin/mono [0x1010099c] > /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_invoke+0x1c) [0x1005b6b0] > /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_exec_main+0xc8) [0x10060a5c] > /usr/bin/mono(mono_runtime_run_main+0x15c) [0x10061dc8] > /usr/bin/mono(mono_jit_exec+0x98) [0x10014230] > /usr/bin/mono(mono_main+0x105c) [0x100152a8] > /usr/bin/mono [0x10013c40] > /lib/libc.so.6 [0xfc20280] > /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0x138) [0xfc2048c] > make[1]: *** [gnomedb-sharp.dll] Aborted > make[1]: Leaving directory > `/builddir/build/BUILD/libgnomedb-1.9.100/gnomedb-sharp' > make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.87504 (%build) > > > RPM build errors: > Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.87504 (%build) > > > From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Jan 17 12:59:11 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:59:11 +0100 Subject: Self-Introduction: Christian Iseli Message-ID: <200601171259.k0HCxBBT024920@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear all, While browsing the Extras wiki pages, I suddenly realized I never submitted a proper self-introduction message on this list. Sorry about that. Here it is... Full legal name: Christian Iseli City, Country: Lausanne, Switzerland Profession: Computer engineer, system manager, bioinformatician Company: Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research (http://www.licr.org) and Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (http://www.isb-sib.ch) My goals in the Fedora Project: - make Fedora a good choice for the bioinformatics field o Packages I want to see published: - mainly bioinformatics packages, and system management type packages o Do I want to do QA? - sure Historical qualifications - I have a PhD in computer engineering. My thesis was on reconfigurable processors (using FPGA chips) and accompanying tools (compilers and such...) o What other projects have you worked on in the past? - I have not been part of an open source project team, but I worked for a couple years on porting binutils/gcc to a small microprocessor and got some patches included upstream (in EGCS at the time...) I also have a few projects on SourceForge, username c4chris o What computer languages and other skills do you know? - nowadays it's mainly C and Perl, but whatever works... - I know my way in Linux and Solaris (been managing Sun machines since the Sun 2 in 1985 or so...) I also had some fun with HP/UX, Tru-64, VMS, Tops-20, NOS/BE and some others I don't care too much to remember... o Why should we trust you? - because I'm Kaa singing "Trust in me" ? :-) GPG KEYID and fingerprint o Be sure that your GPG key is uploaded to pgp.mit.edu. - yup, that's done Here are the gory details: pub 1024D/6D056931 2003-03-06 Key fingerprint = 4FA8 A97C D4BC 5A4B 8AB6 5872 9414 DD3C 6D05 6931 uid Christian Iseli sub 1024g/1F4FCEFE 2003-03-06 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDzOnzlBTdPG0FaTERAov2AJ9i74kkpVsxbxz8JXIb6h+pCC86VgCeK8Oq uAqmCkU5DfYm4cbJPGIXw2s= =c7E0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 17 13:19:05 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:19:05 -0800 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> References: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> Message-ID: <1137503946.3214.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:12 +0100, Adrian Reber wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:59:53PM +0100, Chris Chabot wrote: > > I'd be willing to take over: > > > > themes-backgrounds-gnome > > gnome-themes-extras > > > > Recently added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages > > > > Opened bugs for these here: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 > > Sorry, if I missed it but since when are bugs opened for change of > maintainership? According to the wiki I it didn't change and what I > don't understand is: who will work and close these bugs? > > The only sentence in the wiki about bugzilla is: > > "open bug reports in bugzilla where package owner's attention is > needed." My reading of the wiki is that if the package is orphaned for less than 10 days, a bugzilla should be opened so that it can be discussed on the list before ownership is taken. Well, actually it says "For a package that is listed here for less than 10 days, volunteers for package ownership are collected here for a week. This gives some time for discussing (also among the volunteers) which of multiple volunteers will be the primary package owner or how to team up." The discussion bit for packages orphaned less than 10 days seems to imply a bugzilla to me, as the wiki page isn't really set up for discussion, but :shrug: From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 17 13:39:28 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:39:28 +0100 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? Message-ID: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> Hi all, As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that dosemu actually has something to boot. The problem is that although freedos is GPL and thus comes with full source its impossible to compile it, as it needs to compile: -nasm (opensource, runs on linux, can cross"compile", good) -watcom-C (opensource, but does NOT run on linux, can crosscompile) -Borland Turbo C++ 1.01 (gratis, download only, not redistributable) Especially the last one is a big problem, I've tried to recompile freedos from src on XP that seems to work under dosemu I'm having less success. Assuming that compiling freedos under dosemu succeeds and I write a bash script which starts and pokes dosemu todo just that, I still need 3 binary tools todo this of which 1 is non opensource, I can probably get the other 2 to build underdosemu too (nasm builds with djgpp (gcc for dos) and watcom builds with itself). I currently see 2 options for packaging free dos: 1) build a src.rpm with the sources and the precompiled bins provided by upstream, and during the build just extract the precompiled bins. 2) really build it under dosemu using prebuild versions of the needed dos tools, 2 of which could be in the src.rpm and one needs to be wget-ed during the build! I personally prefer 1) as 2) is going to be a lot of work. Work which I would rather spend in coming up with a way to make one freedos package which will work for both dosemu and dosbox. Ofcourse there are also options 3 and 4: 3) live with having to wget turbo c++, but do the others opensource all the way. First create packages using precompiled bins, then use these to bootstrap a real build (compile) of these packages under dosemu 4) since we can't build it one can argue that it is not opensource, thus we can't ship it. Opinions and options 5 - xx much appreciated. Regards, Hans From jamatos at fc.up.pt Tue Jan 17 12:49:22 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:49:22 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 07:15, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185& >rev1=184 I would like to take fftw, since grace depends on it and I am maintaining it. -- Jos? Ab?lio From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 14:13:29 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:13:29 -0500 Subject: Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 In-Reply-To: <43ccc056.27afe3b8.24b8.ffffda50SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.gmail.com> References: <43ccc056.27afe3b8.24b8.ffffda50SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910601170613m5331210ah595a7cffef927e3b@mail.gmail.com> On 1/17/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > This is an automated mail. > Your following packages in the repository have broken dependencies: > > package: istanbul - 0.1.1-5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 > unresolved deps: > gstreamer-plugins >= 0:0.8.9 > > Sweet! automated mail! Is the subject line finalized? I want to make sure I build an appropriate filter to flag these mails reliably so I don't lose them in the noise of my in box. -jef From qspencer at ieee.org Tue Jan 17 14:16:40 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 08:16:40 -0600 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> Jose' Matos wrote: >On Tuesday 17 January 2006 07:15, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > >>Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to >>maintain in Extras. More info: >>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185& >>rev1=184 >> >> > >I would like to take fftw, since grace depends on it and I am maintaining it. > > Does grace require fftw 2.x, or can it work with 3.x? The 3.x releases of fftw are maintained by me in Extras as fftw3. I wouldn't mind seeing the old one go away if nobody needs it and making fftw3 -> fftw. The fftw 3.x series has been around for over 2 1/2 years. At what point does it make sense to move the old fftw to a name like fftw2? Are there any conventions for this sort of thing? -Quentin From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 14:23:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:23:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] New: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template 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=178021 Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: Christian.Iseli at licr.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/software/unix/SIBsim4.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/software/unix/SIBsim4-0.9-0.src.rpm Description: SIBsim4 is a modified version of the sim4 program, which is a similarity-based tool for aligning an expressed DNA sequence (EST, mRNA) with a genomic sequence. I maintain the package on SourceForge here: http://sibsim4.sf.net Builds in mock, rpmlint is silent. Just one binary, one man-page, and one COPYRIGHT 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 Tue Jan 17 14:25:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:25:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176981] Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171425.k0HEPL0P025211@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 green at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-17 09:25 EST ------- Thanks for you help Chris! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 14:25:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:25:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171425.k0HEPYq7025288@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 Bug 176982 depends on bug 176981, which changed state. Bug 176981 Summary: Review Request: itext - a PDF creation library in java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176981 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 Jan 17 15:01:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:01:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176982] Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171501.k0HF13Ct031663@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: RSSOwl - an RSS/RDS/Atom Newsreader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176982 green at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-17 10:00 EST ------- Thanks - I'm closing this 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 jamatos at fc.up.pt Tue Jan 17 15:16:46 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:16:46 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> Message-ID: <200601171516.46154.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 14:16, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > Does grace require fftw 2.x, or can it work with 3.x? fftw 2.x and fftw 3.x are different and incompatible releases. In the particular case of grace it only works with 2.x. I am not sure if the future major release (6.0) will work with 3.x but that is not true now. > The 3.x releases > of fftw are maintained by me in Extras as fftw3. I wouldn't mind seeing > the old one go away if nobody needs it and making fftw3 -> fftw. The > fftw 3.x series has been around for over 2 1/2 years. At what point does > it make sense to move the old fftw to a name like fftw2? Are there any > conventions for this sort of thing? Clearly I would not mind to have this change. It makes more sense to me. I would like also to see this as policy written by FESCO. But that is just me. :-) > -Quentin -- Jos? Ab?lio From Matt_Domsch at dell.com Tue Jan 17 15:19:39 2006 From: Matt_Domsch at dell.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:19:39 -0600 Subject: un-orphaning i810switch Message-ID: <20060117151939.GA27593@lists.us.dell.com> With no objections, I'll take over i810switch, which has been orphaned since 2005-05-12. Thanks, Matt -- 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 bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Jan 17 15:20:08 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:20:08 -0500 Subject: Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 In-Reply-To: <200601171000.k0HA0d5j007581@flpvm02.prodigy.net> References: <200601171000.k0HA0d5j007581@flpvm02.prodigy.net> Message-ID: <1137511208.6059.2.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.com> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 02:00 -0800, Michael Schwendt wrote: > This is an automated mail. > Your following packages in the repository have broken dependencies: > > package: contact-lookup-applet - 0.13-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 > unresolved deps: > libedataserver-1.2.so.4 > Thanks for the note. /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 bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Jan 17 15:23:50 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:23:50 -0500 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137511430.6059.3.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.com> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 09:15 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 > I'll volunteer for meld. /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 denis at poolshark.org Tue Jan 17 15:39:53 2006 From: denis at poolshark.org (Denis Leroy) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:39:53 -0800 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <43CD0FC9.2030903@poolshark.org> Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 > > I'll take libsigc++ From smooge at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 15:46:46 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen J. Smoogen) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 08:46:46 -0700 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <80d7e4090601170746q14bfb50fy41e1a8720eba829@mail.gmail.com> On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi all, > > As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would > really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that > dosemu actually has something to boot. > Now for the stupid comment from the peanut gallery. How hard would it be to get freedos to compile under cygnus-tools? Man-years? Or not the right tool at all. -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 17 16:21:39 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:21:39 +0100 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 14:39 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi all, > > As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would > really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that > dosemu actually has something to boot. > > The problem is that although freedos is GPL and thus comes with full > source its impossible to compile it, as it needs to compile: Why should this be a problem? IMO, DOS executables are not any different from any other binaries to be shipped with Fedora, such a BIOS images, cross-toolchain target-libraries or picture images. To Linux, they all are binary data, to be interpreted by an interpreter running under Linux. I.e. as long as you are legitmated to redistribute these binary data files, I don't see why they should be a problem and why there should be a need to rebuild them under Linux. The only special problem I see is them being GPL'ed. You'd therefore have to bundle the sources, even if you can't rebuild them under Linux. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 16:21:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:21:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601171621.k0HGLEPX014138@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 ------- Additional Comments From dcantrel at redhat.com 2006-01-17 11:21 EST ------- I see. Well, I see no reason not to go forth and include these two packages. I created them not thinking they were there. If you have them already, that's great. Let's put them in 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Jan 17 16:39:23 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:23 +0100 Subject: Maintainership of 2 orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1137503946.3214.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <1137499194.4193.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060117121233.GA20503@lisas.de> <1137503946.3214.18.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060117173923.0fa5cb11.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:19:05 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote: > My reading of the wiki is that if the package is orphaned for less than > 10 days, a bugzilla should be opened so that it can be discussed on the > list before ownership is taken. Now you say it yourself: _the list_. E-mail instead of bugzilla. The thread with the subject "Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs" is an example of how discussion related to orphaned packages can look. Notice how several people show interest in fftw, for example, and discuss what to do with it. fedora-extras-list is the right place for discussion all this. From sopwith at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 17:17:11 2006 From: sopwith at redhat.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:17:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: extras-commits-list dead In-Reply-To: <1137479156.20280.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1137479156.20280.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > seem extras-commits-list is dead (not one single mail in the last 11 > hours) -- could you take a look what's wrong? tia! My bad - I've been jiggering around with the mail setup for Fedora and missed a piece. It should be flowing now, but some e-mails may have been lost. Best, -- Elliot Red Hat Summit Nashville (May 30 - June 2, 2006) http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/ From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 17 18:11:33 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:11:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > I.e. as long as you are legitmated to redistribute these binary data > files, I don't see why they should be a problem and why there should be > a need to rebuild them under Linux. > > The only special problem I see is them being GPL'ed. You'd therefore > have to bundle the sources, even if you can't rebuild them under Linux. +1 This is the way to go. Binary-only. Linus From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 17 18:33:12 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:33:12 +0100 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090601170746q14bfb50fy41e1a8720eba829@mail.gmail.com> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <80d7e4090601170746q14bfb50fy41e1a8720eba829@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43CD3868.3030309@hhs.nl> Stephen J. Smoogen wrote: > On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would >> really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that >> dosemu actually has something to boot. >> > > Now for the stupid comment from the peanut gallery. How hard would it > be to get freedos to compile under cygnus-tools? Man-years? Or not the > right tool at all. > Erm cygwin is a 32bit windoze compiler, freedos is a 16bit KERNEL (like no OS underneed) and 16bit dos programs like command.com Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Jan 17 18:37:16 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:37:16 +0100 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 14:39 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would >> really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that >> dosemu actually has something to boot. >> >> The problem is that although freedos is GPL and thus comes with full >> source its impossible to compile it, as it needs to compile: > Why should this be a problem? IMO, DOS executables are not any different > from any other binaries to be shipped with Fedora, such a BIOS images, > cross-toolchain target-libraries or picture images. To Linux, they all > are binary data, to be interpreted by an interpreter running under > Linux. > Well thats cutting the corner a bit, so the same would go for windows apps which run under wine, but then why not compile native with winelib? I for one would like to see firmware actually get build instead of shipped as blob's. (If the firmware comes with source and we can get our hands on the tools to compile). What you're saying now is, as long as it is not a native linux binary, license / freedom doesn't matter anymore as long as its distributable. I do ofcourse fully agree that in this case this is the best solution, but that is my pragmatic side, not my idealist side. > I.e. as long as you are legitmated to redistribute these binary data > files, I don't see why they should be a problem and why there should be > a need to rebuild them under Linux. > Redistribution is no problem. > The only special problem I see is them being GPL'ed. You'd therefore > have to bundle the sources, even if you can't rebuild them under Linux. > That I was already planning Regards, Hans From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 17 18:34:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:34:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060117183457.BC623808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 11 alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.2.rc1.fc3 clamav-0.88-1.fc3 cogito-0.16.3-1.fc3 cook-2.26-1.fc3 dejavu-fonts-2.2-1.fc3 dejavu-fonts-2.2-2.fc3 git-1.1.2-1.fc3 streamtuner-0.99.99-11.fc3 tclhttpd-3.5.1-6.fc3 tkcvs-8.0.1-1.fc3 xkeycaps-2.46-3.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 Tue Jan 17 18:35:25 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:35:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060117183525.31D5A808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 28 alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.2.rc1.fc4 autotrace-0.31.1-8.fc4 clamav-0.88-1.fc4 cln-1.1.11-1.fc4 cogito-0.16.3-1.fc4 cook-2.26-1.fc4 dejavu-fonts-2.2-1.fc4 dejavu-fonts-2.2-2.fc4 git-1.1.2-1.fc4 gnotime-2.2.2-1.fc4 gtranslator-1.1.6-2.fc4 liferea-1.0.1-1.fc4 meld-1.1.2-1.fc4 mysql-administrator-1.1.6-1.fc4 perl-Convert-UUlib-1.06-1.fc4 perl-HTML-Tree-3.1901-2.fc4 perl-MIME-tools-5.419-1.fc4 python-setuptools-0.6a9-1.fc4 qof-0.6.1-1.fc4 rt3-3.4.5-1.fc4 t1lib-5.1.0-4.fc4 t1utils-1.32-4.fc4 tclhttpd-3.5.1-6.fc4 tkcvs-8.0.1-1.fc4 trac-0.9.3-4.fc4 ttf2pt1-3.4.4-5.fc4 ttf2pt1-3.4.4-6.fc4 xkeycaps-2.46-3.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 Jan 17 18:37:34 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:37:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060117183734.24B72808E@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 60 Coin2-2.4.4-7.fc5 Coin2-2.4.4-8.fc5 Glide3-20050815-2 Glide3-libGL-6.2.1-4 SIMVoleon-2.0.1-2.fc5 alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.2.rc1.fc5 autotrace-0.31.1-10.fc5 cln-1.1.11-2.fc5 cogito-0.16.3-1.fc5 contact-lookup-applet-0.13-5.fc5 cook-2.26-1.fc5 dejavu-fonts-2.2-1.fc5 dejavu-fonts-2.2-3.fc5 digikam-0.8.0-15.fc5 fig2ps-1.3.5-1 freeze-2.5.0-5.fc5 gajim-0.9.1-1.fc5 git-1.1.2-1.fc5 gkrellmms-2.1.22-4.fc5 gnome-blog-0.8-10.fc5 gpp-0.6.5-2.fc5 gtranslator-1.1.6-2.fc5 itext-1.3-1jpp_6.fc5 krusader-1.60.1-6.fc5 lcdf-typetools-2.36-2.fc5 libgda-1.9.100-2 libgda-1.9.100-3 libgnomedb-1.9.100-3 libgnomedb-1.9.100-4 licq-1.3.2-4 liferea-1.0.1-2.fc5 lighttpd-1.4.9-1.fc5 lzo-1.08-5.fc5 mail-notification-2.0-9.fc5 mysql-administrator-1.1.6-1.fc5 nomarch-1.3-4.fc5 pan-0.14.2.91-3.3.fc5 perl-Convert-UUlib-1.06-1.fc5 perl-HTML-Tree-3.1901-1.fc5 perl-HTML-Tree-3.1901-2.fc5 perl-MIME-tools-5.419-1.fc5 perl-Net-SSLeay-1.30-1.fc5 ppracer-0.3.1-5 python-setuptools-0.6a9-1.fc5 python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1.fc5 qof-0.6.1-1.fc5 rssowl-1.2-7.fc5 splint-3.1.1-11.fc5 t1lib-5.1.0-3.fc5 t1lib-5.1.0-4.fc5 t1utils-1.32-5.fc5 tclhttpd-3.5.1-6.fc5 tkcvs-8.0.1-1.fc5 trac-0.9.3-4.fc5 ttf2pt1-3.4.4-5.fc5 ttf2pt1-3.4.4-6.fc5 wavpack-4.31-1.fc5 xkeycaps-2.46-2.fc5 xkeycaps-2.46-3.fc5 zoo-2.10-4.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From smooge at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 19:03:29 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen J. Smoogen) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:03:29 -0700 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <43CD3868.3030309@hhs.nl> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <80d7e4090601170746q14bfb50fy41e1a8720eba829@mail.gmail.com> <43CD3868.3030309@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <80d7e4090601171103s418fe233t3c5d7d166b368439@mail.gmail.com> On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Stephen J. Smoogen wrote: > > On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> As discussed sometime ago I'm planning on packaging dosemu. I would > >> really like to also package freedos and make dosemu depend on it so that > >> dosemu actually has something to boot. > >> > > > > Now for the stupid comment from the peanut gallery. How hard would it > > be to get freedos to compile under cygnus-tools? Man-years? Or not the > > right tool at all. > > > > Erm cygwin is a 32bit windoze compiler, freedos is a 16bit KERNEL (like > no OS underneed) and 16bit dos programs like command.com Like I said stupid question. I am guessing that it would also be impossible to get the DJPP 16 bit compilers to work with it either. > > Regards, > > Hans > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From Jochen at herr-schmitt.de Tue Jan 17 19:12:29 2006 From: Jochen at herr-schmitt.de (Jochen Schmitt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:12:29 +0100 Subject: Take Ovnership of orphaned package blender Message-ID: <20060117191229.GA18756@myhome> Hello, I saw, that blender is listed in the list of orphaned packages. Becouse the version 2.40 of blender was released, I build a new package for this version on my maschine. So I want to adopt the package and check in the new version into CVS. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 19:22:44 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:22:44 -0500 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <604aa7910601171122g4ea6eb89m276289d1c017856a@mail.gmail.com> On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > What you're saying now is, as long as it is not a native linux binary, > license / freedom doesn't matter anymore as long as its distributable. If its not linux native and If you can get it to compile under fedora using the cross-compiling tools which are available great... if you can't.. then its a case by case basis. My question to you is, how do you plan to maintain freedos? Since you can't use the normal fedora buildsystem to incorporate patches.. whats you plan as the maintainer if functionality problems arise? If freedos is viewed as dosemu content, then I could certainly make the argument that its like game levels for a game and is permissible content. But I would not be particularly thrilled to see that definition of permissible content extented to allow a collection dos executable software sitting in the fedora tree that works on top of the freedos kernel. I think we have to be reasonable and limit what fedora provides to what is required to get a minimal dos environment and let users pull additional dos executables from sources other than Fedora. -jef From mpeters at mac.com Tue Jan 17 19:32:01 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:32:01 -0800 Subject: Maintainership of Firestarter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1137526322.8009.7.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 06:47 -0500, 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. > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178010 Bug closed as it is improper. -=- I'd like to take maintainership of firestarter. I've got a couple small patches (one that removes browser links from the help menu since it runs as root and thus opens browser as root, and one that adds CUPS and APCUPSD to the menu of easily selectable services), and have done a little bit of cleanup to reduce rpmlint errors. I still need to package the documentation since I'd like to remove the external url documentation link, and I need to investigate bug 160431 From imlinux at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 19:40:17 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:40:17 -0600 Subject: chcon and webapps Message-ID: <43CD4821.7020002@gmail.com> Does anyone know of any web based applications that are currently in extras or core that use chcon to change contexts of its files? -Mike From wtogami at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 19:46:58 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:46:58 -0500 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43CD49B2.6080100@redhat.com> My take on mass rebuilds... 1) Fix things manually for now as they need fixing. 2) Wait until Jakub says that the gcc and glibc are in good shape, then proceed with a mass rebuild. I haven't had a chance to talk with him sine late last week, but he was working on a fairly bad ABI sounding regression at the time. I will wait until he gives us a status update. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Jan 17 20:05:27 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:05:27 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137435323.2801.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137435323.2801.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137528327.28950.138.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 19:15 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Should we have add a %{?kmod_per_package_add-on} into the output that > get_rpmtemplate creates? Urk, yes, I've considered stuff like that too, but hated it enough to not even suggest it ;) I hope and believe these things can be taken care of in the userspace $foo-common package, possibly using triggers if absolutely needed and if nothing else works. > Take for example the nvidia-drivers of a well known 3rd party repo: they > currently have a > Conflicts: kernel-module-nvidia-legacy-%{kernel} > in them -- that would not be possible with the new scheme and that > sounds like a problem to me. Isn't it enough to make the userspace packages (ones providing nvidia-glx-common and nvidia-glx-legacy-common) conflict with each other? > They also have some special things for %pre and %post which lead to the > question: Do we also need something like > %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_pre} > %{?kmod_per_package_add-on_postun} ...and the same for preun, post, pretrans, posttrans, triggerprein, triggerin, triggerun, triggerpostun... > > [URLs to sample packages] > > Creat, thanks! Looks quite good. Ok, next round: added RHEL4 compatibility (packaging-wise, not code). Informational patches to kmodtool and lirc-kmod.spec attached, containing only the essential changes that were made to accomplish this. http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.9.pre4.2.6.15_1.1858_FC5.src.rpm http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-8.2.6.14_1.1656_FC4.src.rpm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: kmodtool.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1187 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: spec.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1408 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 20:04:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:04:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172004.k0HK4Jd9032023@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-17 15:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > ok - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on > at least one supported architecture. > > Builds ok under devel. > Doesn't build on fc4 due to modular X and unavailable gnome packages, > I assume it's just targeted at devel and beyond. Yes, the base package requires gnome-vfs2-devel >= 2.12 and libgnomeui-devel >= 2.12. FC4 only has 2.10. The modular X dependency could be worked around but I doubt that FC4 will ever get a newer version of Gnome. > NEEDINFO MUST items: > > 1 - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. > > filesystem package owns /usr/libexec. I guess it's safe to assume filesystem is > installed, but > perhaps it should have a explicit requires for it? > 2 - 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 > PackagingGuidelines. 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. > > Should this package have a .desktop file since it's got a applet? I don't think that a .desktop file would be useful since it's just an applet. The applet shows up in the "Add to Panel" dialog (right click on a panel and then select "Add to Panel..."). > 3 - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in > the review. > > Some rpmlint output: > > W: byzanz summary-ended-with-dot A desktop recorder. > Should remove . on the end of summary. Will fix in the next version. > W: byzanz non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec > I guess this can be ignored, but see note 1 above. > SHOULD Items: > > ok - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. > 4 - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all > supported architectures. > > I only have a x86 test box. I assume it will build ok on other arches. I builds in mock on i386/devel and x86_64/devel. > 5 - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. ... > > I am getting a segfault when I run the application on my devel test machine. > I was running inside a vnc session, but tried both Xfce and gnome. > (I don't have a monitor on my test box right at the moment). > > [...] > > Let me know if I can provide any more information on tracking the segfault down. This could be related to the use of VNC. We probably need to bring this segfault to the attention of the author (Benjamin Otte). It works in the few tests that I did on i386/devel system. I'll post updated packages in a bit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 20:05:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172005.k0HK598s032170@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 15:04 EST ------- I'll pick it up, feel free to assign the bug to me, working on formal reviewlist 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 Tue Jan 17 20:20:37 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:20:37 +0000 Subject: chcon and webapps In-Reply-To: <43CD4821.7020002@gmail.com> References: <43CD4821.7020002@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1137529237.6979.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:40 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Does anyone know of any web based applications that are currently in > extras or core that use chcon to change contexts of its files? The usual thing to do is to get the required contexts incorporated into the SELinux policy itself. Example: rt3 (http://bugzilla.redhat.com/169247 http://bugzilla.redhat.com/170998) FC5 will have policy modules, where individual packages can tweak policy, but I don't know how that works or how to implement it (yet). Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 20:19:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:19:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172019.k0HKJtpx002169@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-17 15:19 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/byzanz-0.0.3-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/byzanz-0.0.3-2.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 Tue Jan 17 20:27:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:27:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172027.k0HKR8GK004073@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-17 15:27 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > (Uncovered a bug in the default > sample here, fixed it in 0.22). Let me roll up binaries of 0.22 and make sure the sample works as you describe and I will then approve 0.22 for cvs import. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 20:31:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:31:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172031.k0HKVYd2004914@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 15:31 EST ------- First few observations: Release 0, we start releases at '1' :-) Maybe better to use install -m664 for the manpage and -m755 for the binary? that way your always sure the file modes are correct. Compile failed for me, is there something i'm missing? (up to date fc-development-i386 box): gcc -o SIBsim4 -std=gnu99 -W -Wall -pedantic -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables sim4b1.o align.o misc.o sim4.init.o sim4b1.o: In function `pluri_align':/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SIBsim4-0.9/sim4b1.c:1315: undefined reference to `floor' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [sim4] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.49523 (%build) man floor tells me this file should be linked with "-lm" to fix this error. Please correct the above errors (guidelines say package should atleast compile on fc devel), and post new src.rpm and i'll go thru the formar reviewlist. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Tue Jan 17 20:36:18 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:36:18 -0800 Subject: un-orphaning i810switch In-Reply-To: <20060117151939.GA27593@lists.us.dell.com> (Matt Domsch's message of "Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:19:39 -0600") References: <20060117151939.GA27593@lists.us.dell.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "MD" == Matt Domsch writes: MD> With no objections, I'll take over i810switch, which has been MD> orphaned since 2005-05-12. Fantastic! I've reassigned a bug to upgrade it to the latest version to you... ;-) http://bugzilla.redhat.com/171199 Alex From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 17 20:52:21 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:52:21 +0100 (CET) Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Hans de Goede wrote: > Well thats cutting the corner a bit, so the same would go for windows apps > which run under wine, but then why not compile native with winelib? Not everything compiles with winelib? Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 21:45:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172145.k0HLjHCB020767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-17 16:44 EST ------- Late but still today :) http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/torsmo-0.18-3.src.rpm http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/torsmo.spec it is still missing the icon... do you have something in mind or should we leave it for 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 Tue Jan 17 21:58:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:58:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172158.k0HLwgYf023925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 16:58 EST ------- Better late then never right? :-) Changelog format currently is: * Tue Jan 17 2006 Andreas Bierfert 0.18-3 But should be: * Tue Jan 17 2006 Andreas Bierfert - 0.18-3 Which makes rpmlint complain: W: torsmo no-version-in-last-changelog sample torsmo.rc is now included, i'm sure this will help users a lot :-) Might be worth adding a quick note in the description to check out the torsmorc.sample file in the doc dir? (just so they know how to find it, very much optional, just an idea) Whole torsmo project is missing an icon, so i guess its ok to leave it out :-) Formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint's only output is a version/changelog warning (see above) - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (BSD) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - Has propper desktop file / -installation and desktop-file-utils BR Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds cleanly on fc-devel-i386 FE-APPROVED but please do fix the changelog entries before commiting the srpm to cvs :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 22:01:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:01:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172201.k0HM1N5E024629@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 17:01 EST ------- ps the line wrapping made the version in changelog note come out all wrong. Changelog entries should be in the following format: * Date Who - maj.min-rel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 22:10:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:10:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172210.k0HMARTT026469@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-17 17:10 EST ------- How about this: Torsmo (TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor) is a system monitor that sits in the corner of your desktop. Torsmo can show various information about your system and its peripherals. Torsmo is very light and customizable, and it renders text on the root window. For a sample configuration take a look torsmorc.sample. As to the changelog format: putting maj.min-rel in the next line was accepted for all my other packages because of my long name email combination. If you don't mind I will leave it as is :) Thanks for taking your time to review 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 Tue Jan 17 22:15:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:15:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172215.k0HMFScf027814@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 17:15 EST ------- Desciption sounds good to me, i'm sure it'll help some users find their way :-) As for version line, well some external programs that depend on sane version lines might dislike it, but i guess if its already accepted policy due to your long name/email then who am i to argue :-) Ps pls don't forget to assign the bug to me on closing to NEXTRELEASE (after make tag/build) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 22:26:20 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:26:20 +0100 Subject: Extras updates for FC3 and older? (was: Re: Mono package policy) In-Reply-To: <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:44:49 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:22 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > > > until FC-5 goes GOLD. > > > > FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow > > new FC3 packages in extras after that?! > > It's at the maintainer's discretion. Note that FE currently has some > packages with branches going all the way back to RHL9. No. Fedora Extras is only for FC3 and above. The older branches are fedora.us stuff. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 17 22:34:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:34:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172234.k0HMYm53031802@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-17 17:34 EST ------- Thanks :) imported but buildsys is not working at... will close the bug once it is build for 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 Tue Jan 17 23:10:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:10:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172310.k0HNA3Yx005896@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-17 18:09 EST ------- Ping spot, come in spot... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 23:33:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:33:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175748] Review Request: cacti In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172333.k0HNXSM7009357@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cacti https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175748 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-17 18:33 EST ------- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/cacti/cacti.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/cacti/cacti-0.8.6h-3.src.rpm Changes: -Moved log files back to /var/log/cacti -Moved Scripts back to /var/lib/cacti/scripts -Moved rra files back to /var/lib/cacti/rra -Changed logfile to (664,cacti,apache) so the "clear log file" will work -Upstream had a new version come out -Upstream already had 4 patches for that version SELinux suggestion made by Paul Howarth sounds very reasonable: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-January/msg01169.html If Cacti gets approved I'll submit a bug report to SELinux and try to get it incorperated into the policy. I'll use the FC5 modules once FC5 comes out (if it applies) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 17 23:51:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:51:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601172351.k0HNplsf013103@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-17 18:51 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Still there is a bug: > E: smb4k invalid-directory-reference /usr/lib64/kde3/konqsidebar_smb4k.la I've been reading today Maikefile.am files but I'm still a newbie in an Autotools world :/ The only thing I can propose right now is adding these lines: # ugly workaround for broken libtool archive sed -i -e "s:-L%{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/smb4k/core ::" \ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/kde3/konqsidebar_smb4k.la sed -i -e "s:-L%{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/smb4k/widgets ::" \ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/kde3/konqsidebar_smb4k.la before execution of %find_lang macro. I see also in konqsidebar_smb4k.la references to /usr/lib/libsmb4kcore.la and /usr/lib/libsmb4kwidgets.la in dependency_libs field. I'm not shure whether they can be removed (Konqueror plugin works without them fine, though). Someone more knowledgeable should answer this question. Yuck, libtool archives make me sick... ;-) (In reply to comment #5) > It's strange. I've added --disable-dependency-tracking & --enable-final to > Krusader's configure (in devel tree) and compilation failed I've been tesing these options with smb4k on my Rawhide box and it compiles fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Tue Jan 17 23:57:42 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:57:42 +0100 Subject: Package foo enqueued. (However, no Job ID was provided in the time required) In-Reply-To: <43CBF963.1040108@laposte.net> References: <43CBF963.1040108@laposte.net> Message-ID: <43CD8476.7080707@laposte.net> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Methinks it's time to do some kicking again please ? -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 00:03:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:03:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180003.k0I03Erg014534@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 Christian.Iseli at licr.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-17 19:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Release 0, we start releases at '1' :-) Sure, but it is not unusual for review requests to start at 0... :-) > Maybe better to use install -m664 for the manpage and -m755 for the binary? Done. > Compile failed for me, is there something i'm missing? No, brain fart on my side (long story is that it works in some cases without the math lib due to compiler optimizations, but it all depends on the compiler switches used and on th etarget architecture...). Fixed. New spec and SRPMS are here: ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/software/unix/SIBsim4.spec ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/software/unix/SIBsim4-0.9-1.src.rpm 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 Wed Jan 18 00:19:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:19:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180019.k0I0JiGZ016804@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 19:19 EST ------- Looking good, package compiles perfectly for me now, rpmlint is quiet and mock is happy too. The formal review checklist: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included (COPYRIGHT) - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - No build dependencies - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - Not GUI app, no desktop file needed Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds cleanly Thanks for the quick updates! Package is FE-ACCEPTED Please cvs-import, make tag, make build and after this assign the bug to me please and close with NEXTRELEASE as resolution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 00:35:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:35:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178141] New: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI 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=178141 Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: green at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli-1.0-6jpp_1.src.rpm Description: The CLI library provides a simple and easy to use API for working with the command line arguments and options. I'm submitting this package in preparation for submitting Azureus, which depends on 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 Wed Jan 18 00:36:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:36:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] New: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI 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=178142 Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: green at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli-1.0-6jpp_1.src.rpm Description: The CLI library provides a simple and easy to use API for working with the command line arguments and options. I'm submitting this package in preparation for submitting Azureus, which depends on 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 ivazquez at ivazquez.net Wed Jan 18 01:05:08 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:05:08 -0500 Subject: Extras updates for FC3 and older? (was: Re: Mono package policy) In-Reply-To: <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137546308.16904.0.camel@ignacio.lan> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 23:26 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:44:49 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:22 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > > > > until FC-5 goes GOLD. > > > > > > FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow > > > new FC3 packages in extras after that?! > > > > It's at the maintainer's discretion. Note that FE currently has some > > packages with branches going all the way back to RHL9. > > No. Fedora Extras is only for FC3 and above. The older branches are > fedora.us stuff. Nonetheless there is sufficient metadata in CVS for them. The buildsystem is another issue though. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 01:01:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:01:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177993] Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180101.k0I117KM023491@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177993 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-17 20:00 EST ------- * Mon Jan 17 2006 Paul Wouters 1.0-2 - Fixed install target for man page and cleaning before install ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/fetchlog/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/fetchlog.spec ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/fetchlog/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/fetchlog-1.0-2.src.rpm I've always put the doc/man entries last in the files section, because I tend to focus on the binaries and libraries first, and never had a complaint about that :) The other two errors have been 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 Wed Jan 18 01:13:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:13:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180113.k0I1Di5D024841@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 20:13 EST ------- If no one else picks this up before tomorrow morning i'll take it on then Can't wait for seeing Azureus btw :-) Bouncy castle following 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 Wed Jan 18 01:16:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:16:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178141] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180116.k0I1GE5s025085@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178141 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-17 20:16 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 178142 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 01:16:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:16:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180116.k0I1GNhH025139@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-17 20:16 EST ------- *** Bug 178141 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 Wed Jan 18 01:18:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:18:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177993] Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180118.k0I1Injb025439@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fetchlog - displays the last new messages of a logfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177993 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-17 20:18 EST ------- Guess other people never noticed, or aren't as perfectionistic as me, first spec file i've seen in fedora with doc not bellow defattr, but its definatly not a blocker, just matter of taste i guess :-) Manpage and clean section are conform standards now too, still builds and mocks cleanly too. Formal check list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list BuildRequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - No gui app, so no need for a desktop file Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (LICENSE) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds correctly Thanks for the updates, FE-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 Wed Jan 18 01:21:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:21:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180121.k0I1LIPr025776@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-17 20:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > If no one else picks this up before tomorrow morning i'll take it on then Thanks. > Can't wait for seeing Azureus btw :-) Bouncy castle following soon? I'm going to see if we can get away with just the GNU Crypto provider, instead of importing all of bouncycastle. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imlinux at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 01:34:16 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Michael McGrath) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:34:16 -0600 Subject: OpenVZ? Message-ID: <3237e4410601171734l1e25b21al6d008a0237627f06@mail.gmail.com> Whats all this about? http://news.com.com/Companies+push+Linux+partitioning+effort/2100-1016_3-6027219.html -Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 01:47:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180147.k0I1lIqt030356@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-17 20:47 EST ------- I still see a file being created in the spec file: %prep %setup -q %patch0 -p1 -b .setgroups sed -i -e 's!^\# *\(Log notice file \)!\1!; s!^\(\# *\)\?DataDirectory .*!DataDirectory %homedir/.tor!' src/config/torrc.sample.in cat <>src/config/torrc.sample.in Group %username User %username EOF I think that should be a separate SOURCE file. It uses a harcoded user/group id of 19. I am not sure what the official policy is for creating users, but I don't think it is needed to create them with a globally set userid, since tor does not span its files over multiple servers. Just giving the toranon user /sbin/nologin, as already done, should be enough. Perhaps there is some "fedora registry" and some policy somewhere for requesting static userids? BuildRequires has libevent-devel, but Requires does not (because it is using libevent statically linked, which is against fedora policies. (I did inform Roger, the main tor developer, of this as well. they should not do this). This needs to be fixed. see further: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-November/msg00386.html I dont think circular dependancies are cool. Currently "tor" requires "tor-lsb" and "tor-lsb" requires "tor". I thnk as an FE package, the initscripts should just come with the tor package. If FC/FE migrates to another system, it can be changed later with everything else. source1 (the gpg signature) is defined but not used. It should probably either not be defined, or it should be used to actualy gpg check the source file in the prep stage. Missing chkconfig --add / --delete in %post, %prun, %postun Missing: Requires(post): /sbin/chkconfig Missing: Requires(preun): /sbin/chkconfig, /sbin/service Missing: Requires(postun): /sbin/service The username/group toranon is good and will prevent conflicts with the common name tor. Daemon correctly ony listens on localhost in the default configuration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ndbecker2 at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 02:02:53 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:02:53 -0500 Subject: numpy-0.9.2, scipy-0.4.4 Message-ID: I have built the new numpy-0.9.2 and scipy-0.4.4 and have some primitive spec files. I'd like someone to pick up this effort. I don't feel I have the resources to be the maintainer. Any volunteers? From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 02:13:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:13:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180213.k0I2DADL001151@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-17 21:13 EST ------- Package for devel is now out. Are we going to see an FC4 build of this? That would be nice, FC5 is still 2 months away from 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 ivazquez at ivazquez.net Wed Jan 18 03:08:49 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:08:49 -0500 Subject: numpy-0.9.2, scipy-0.4.4 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1137553729.19832.2.camel@ignacio.lan> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 21:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > I have built the new numpy-0.9.2 and scipy-0.4.4 and have some primitive > spec files. I'd like someone to pick up this effort. I don't feel I have > the resources to be the maintainer. Any volunteers? What a coincidence, just replied on scipy-devel. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 04:16:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:16:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180416.k0I4GpXs023144@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-17 23:16 EST ------- Actually, libevent is no longer statically linked. But it still needs a Requires: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 04:21:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:21:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180421.k0I4LDjI024026@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176780 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-17 23:21 EST ------- JFC, you'd think I have nothing to do all day but pop out packages for Extras :P Updated. http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/wp_tray-0.5.1-1.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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 05:15:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:15:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] New: Review Request: libgeotiff 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=178162 Summary: Review Request: libgeotiff Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: mccann0011 at hotmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.canasoft.ca/fedora/libgeotiff.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.canasoft.ca/fedora/libgeotiff-1.2.2-2.spec Description: Libgeotiff is a public domain library normally hosted on top of libtiff for reading, and writing GeoTIFF information tags. This package was reviewed last summer. Makefile patch was made in response to review comments and package is being resubmitted for approval. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 05:19:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:19:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180519.k0I5JKq0032660@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 mccann0011 at hotmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: libgeotiff |Review Request: libgeotiff ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-18 00:19 EST ------- Correction to above URL: SPRPM Name or URL: http://www.canasoft.ca/fedora/libgeotiff-1.2.2-2.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 Wed Jan 18 06:09:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:09:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180609.k0I69KX6007681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-18 01:09 EST ------- Hmm, I vaguely recall the discussion on this package ;) Packaging-wise, the package seems fine to me, but I am having concerns on some details: 1. package's licensing: 1.1 The %description reads: "... public domain library ...". libgeotiff definitely is not a "public domain" library: Its sources come under different "open" licenses. (cf. the file LICENSE inside of the tarball). 1.2 LICENSE contains this: The EPSG Tables (from which the CSV files, and .inc files are derived) carried this statement on use of the data (from the EPSG web site): Use of the Data The user assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this data. The data may be copied and distributed subject to the following conditions: ... 3.The data may not be distributed for profit by any third party; and 4.The original source [EPSG] must be acknowledged. IANAL, but this (esp. point 3.) seems problematic wrt. inclusion into FE to me. I read it as: This package contains sources which qualify as for "non-commercial use" only. The question, I can't answer is: Does this license affect the library binaries? 2. /usr/include/geotiff/geo_config.h contains defines which typically are used by autoconf/autoheader and are likely to conflict with autoheaders/autoconf when trying to use geotiff in packages using autoconf-based configuration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 07:14:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 02:14:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601180714.k0I7EPGr017311@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-18 02:14 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > Ping spot, come in spot... I would suggest having working spec/SRPM URLs before pinging Spot. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 07:29:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 02:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] New: Review Request: jigdo 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=178169 Summary: Review Request: jigdo Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ianburrell at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://znark.com/fedora/extras/jigdo.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://znark.com/fedora/extras/jigdo-0.7.2-1.src.rpm Description: Jigsaw Download, or short jigdo, is a tool designed to ease the distribution of very large files over the internet, for example CD or DVD images. Its aim is to make downloading the images as easy for users as a click on a direct download link in a browser, while avoiding all the problems that server administrators have with hosting such large files. It accomplishes this by using the separate pieces of any big file (such as the files contained within a CD/DVD image) to create a special "template" file which makes reassembly of the big file very easy for users who only have the pieces. This is my first package and I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Wed Jan 18 08:07:43 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:07:43 +0100 Subject: Packaging freedos, its GPL but no tools to compile? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601171122g4ea6eb89m276289d1c017856a@mail.gmail.com> References: <43CCF390.60406@hhs.nl> <1137514900.5272.6.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43CD395C.8070606@hhs.nl> <604aa7910601171122g4ea6eb89m276289d1c017856a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43CDF74F.8050500@hhs.nl> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/17/06, Hans de Goede wrote: >> What you're saying now is, as long as it is not a native linux binary, >> license / freedom doesn't matter anymore as long as its distributable. > > If its not linux native and If you can get it to compile under fedora > using the cross-compiling tools which are available great... if you > can't.. then its a case by case basis. > > My question to you is, how do you plan to maintain freedos? Since > you can't use the normal fedora buildsystem to incorporate patches.. > whats you plan as the maintainer if functionality problems arise? > Upstream, upstream and upstream. My knowledge of (free)dos internals is a limit approaching 0. So far upstream is very cooperative and responsive. For example dosemu is GPL with an exception for some files in the src tree which have an X11 like license. Some files however lacked a copyright header und thus one couldn't tell if they we're GPL or had their own license which falls under the exception. I asked them to clearify and in dosemu CVS it is now clearified. Also dosemu crashed on x86_64 unless I added noexec=off the the kernelcmdline, they fixed this in 1 day. > If freedos is viewed as dosemu content, then I could certainly make > the argument that its like game levels for a game and is permissible > content. > I wouldn't want to see the definition of content streched this way myself. I would rather see this as a special case where we have a GPL-app for which we lack the compile chain (and it is impossible to get the compile chain into FE because of license issues). The exception in this case would be handled by putting both the source and the bin tarbal as provided by upstream in the SRPM, and during build just extract the bins. Since upstream claims that those bins where build from those sources using the included instruction and since upstream is the one giving the license, I think that would fully satisfy our GPL obligations. > But I would not be particularly thrilled to see that > definition of permissible content extented to allow a collection dos > executable software sitting in the fedora tree that works on top of > the freedos kernel. I think we have to be reasonable and limit what > fedora provides to what is required to get a minimal dos environment > and let users pull additional dos executables from sources other than > Fedora. > Actually (going offtopic a bit) I was thinking about maybe packaging some other interesting _open source_ dos software to run on top of dosemu+freedos and/or dosbox / bochs / qemu. There seems to be quite a bit of opensource dos software these days. I do however agree that doing so is questionable, does this really belong in FE? Doing so under the contentrules is IMHO a plain no-no, most of this software is build using djgpp which can be compiled under Linux as a crosscompiler, so if we (I) do this I want to really build the packages. Then again I might port some of it to native Linux, that is how I started as a Linux developer porting opensource dos software to Linux, depending on the app the amount of work could be not much more then doing it under an emulator. Regards, Hans From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Jan 18 08:07:16 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:07:16 +0100 Subject: Extras updates for FC3 and older? (was: Re: Mono package policy) In-Reply-To: <1137546308.16904.0.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137546308.16904.0.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <20060118090716.5a384fa3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:05:08 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 23:26 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:44:49 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:22 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > > > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > > > > > until FC-5 goes GOLD. > > > > > > > > FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow > > > > new FC3 packages in extras after that?! > > > > > > It's at the maintainer's discretion. Note that FE currently has some > > > packages with branches going all the way back to RHL9. > > > > No. Fedora Extras is only for FC3 and above. The older branches are > > fedora.us stuff. > > Nonetheless there is sufficient metadata in CVS for them. The > buildsystem is another issue though. It's not that easy. Even if a few packagers still wanted to support RHL9 (as an example) with Extras updates (or updates for old packages from fedora.us, or even with new Extras), for the community project there must be the decision _whether to support such an old release officially or not_. It's a bit like "all or nothing". It would be bad to offer a repository full of stuff which is out-of-date, insecure, untested, hardly used anymore, and so on, just because a few bits are kept up-to-date. If a few packagers continued with updates beyond an announced end-of-life, that even might confuse users out there, who see the dates of the packages and might believe the repository is still alive. End-of-life of a release of Extras ought to mean: everyone, stop shipping updates and move on. That ought to be policy. From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 18 08:23:34 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:23:34 +0100 Subject: Extras updates for FC3 and older? (was: Re: Mono package policy) In-Reply-To: <20060118090716.5a384fa3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137546308.16904.0.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060118090716.5a384fa3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1137572614.2822.19.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Mittwoch, den 18.01.2006, 09:07 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:05:08 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 23:26 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:44:49 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:22 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:11 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > > > > - that mono will not be considered for inclusion in Extras for FC-3/FC-4 > > > > > > until FC-5 goes GOLD. > > > > > FC3 will be unsupported when FC5 test2 comes out. Should we still allow > > > > > new FC3 packages in extras after that?! > > > > It's at the maintainer's discretion. Note that FE currently has some > > > > packages with branches going all the way back to RHL9. > > > No. Fedora Extras is only for FC3 and above. The older branches are > > > fedora.us stuff. > > Nonetheless there is sufficient metadata in CVS for them. The > > buildsystem is another issue though. > > It's not that easy. Even if a few packagers still wanted to support RHL9 > (as an example) with Extras updates (or updates for old packages from > fedora.us, or even with new Extras), for the community project there must > be the decision _whether to support such an old release officially or > not_. It's a bit like "all or nothing". It would be bad to offer a > repository full of stuff which is out-of-date, insecure, untested, hardly > used anymore, and so on, just because a few bits are kept up-to-date. If a > few packagers continued with updates beyond an announced end-of-life, that > even might confuse users out there, who see the dates of the packages and > might believe the repository is still alive. End-of-life of a release of > Extras ought to mean: everyone, stop shipping updates and move on. That > ought to be policy. I agree mostly. Big updates shouldn't happen to Fedora Extras 3 anymore after EOL of Fedora Core 3. *Maybe* we should widen the timeframe a small bit and set the release of Fedora Core n+2 (this would be FC5 in this case). Maye even two or four additional weeks after that -- but not more. But security updates should still be handled by the Extras Maintainers for such a "mostly-end-of-life" Fedora Extras 3. Even if that means that a big version update is needed (but only if there is no other way to avoid that). And no, we can't simply drop this burden to Fedora Legacy. ;-) Just my 2 cent. CU thl From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Jan 18 08:23:42 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:23:42 +0100 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 > > I would take lcms (because its needed for wine and koffice which I both maintain). Also I would like to do blender and then for deps openal and last but not least scribus and scribus templates. - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDzfsOQEQyPsWM8csRArwKAJ4oQGnCSA9xmfhm1FhgJHJpfgsUGgCdFDDx Id/t4g39d8abMuIl1NjqbnI= =+Pxt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From pertusus at free.fr Wed Jan 18 09:31:41 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:31:41 +0100 Subject: taking ownership of libnet10? Message-ID: <20060118093141.GA2919@free.fr> Hello, I can take libnet10, if nobody else is interested, although I hope that nobody uses it anymore, but I know that many projects still use it so maybe it is better to keep it. (see for example http://www.monkey.org/openbsd/archive/ports/0407/msg00203.html for a list of freebsd ports that still used it in 2004). -- Pat From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Jan 18 10:00:18 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:00:18 +0100 Subject: Buildsys needs kicking Message-ID: <43CE11B2.7090309@lowlatency.de> Hi, could it be that the buildsys needs kicking again? It is not accepting jobs (the no job id was provided thing) again. - Andreas From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Jan 18 10:27:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:27:09 +0100 Subject: Extras updates for FC3 and older? (was: Re: Mono package policy) In-Reply-To: <1137572614.2822.19.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1136916696.19767.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137073973.2999.45.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1137077089.26197.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060117232620.1d667d3c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137546308.16904.0.camel@ignacio.lan> <20060118090716.5a384fa3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137572614.2822.19.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060118112709.30d8311a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:23:34 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > I agree mostly. Big updates shouldn't happen to Fedora Extras 3 anymore > after EOL of Fedora Core 3. *Maybe* we should widen the timeframe a > small bit and set the release of Fedora Core n+2 (this would be FC5 in > this case). Maye even two or four additional weeks after that -- but not > more. > > But security updates should still be handled by the Extras Maintainers > for such a "mostly-end-of-life" Fedora Extras 3. Even if that means that > a big version update is needed (but only if there is no other way to > avoid that). > > And no, we can't simply drop this burden to Fedora Legacy. ;-) > > Just my 2 cent. Well, as soon as Fedora Core 3 is transferred to Fedora Legacy, Fedora Extras 3 maintenance ought to be transferred to a similar community project, too. Where you write "security updates _should_ still be handled", that leads to an unfortunate scenario. Only MUSTs or NEEDNOTs move us forward. Extras package maintainers often upgrade to at least FC n+1, possibly even the latest FC. In other words, they abandon the older releases of FC and move on. This also implies that they either cannot do any testing on the old distribution version anymore, or they don't feel comfortable releasing updates for a distribution they don't use regularly. It would be overbearing to require Extras volunteers to extend their maintenance cycle beyond the life-cycle of Fedora Core. If there is community interest in a longer Fedora Extras life-cycle, it is up to additional community volunteers to contribute this. It may be the same packagers if they decide to continue with updates for legacy distributions. But similar to moving Fedora Core to Fedora Legacy, Fedora Extras ought to announce end-of-life and document the support cycle. From tmraz at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 10:29:15 2006 From: tmraz at redhat.com (Tomas Mraz) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:29:15 +0100 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137580155.3289.2.camel@perun.redhat.usu> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 09:15 +0200, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Per Phillip Compton's ack, I've orphaned all the packages he used to > maintain in Extras. More info: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=185&rev1=184 I'd take galculator. -- Tomas Mraz From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 10:36:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:36:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181036.k0IAauEi019834@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176780 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 05:36 EST ------- Thanks update looks good. Formal check list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint: W: wp_tray non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec (ignorable error, its the standard location for applets) - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (GPL) is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list BuildRequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - No directory-ownerships needed - Proper desktop file BR/installing Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (LICENSE) - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds correctly Thanks for the updates, FE-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 Wed Jan 18 10:39:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:39:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181039.k0IAd1xN020386@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-18 05:38 EST ------- Odd - they were there a week or so back. I'll have to rebuild from home tonight and upload. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 10:47:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:47:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181047.k0IAla9t022123@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-18 05:47 EST ------- (In reply to comment #15) > Odd - they were there a week or so back. I'll have to rebuild from home tonight > and upload. Please ensure that the spec file name is "fuse-emulator.spec" rather than "fuse-emulator-0.7.0.spec" when you do 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Jan 18 11:09:28 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:09:28 +0000 Subject: gacutil in a spec file Message-ID: <1137582568.1391.17.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I have the following line in a spec file for mysql-connector-net gacutil -i %{name}-{version}/bin/mono-1.0/release/MySql.Data.dll -gacdir %{buildroot}/usr/lib/mono/gac When I do a binary build, the build fails at this point. However, if I enter from the command line gacutil -i /home/paul/rpmbuild/BUILD/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7/bin/mono-1.0/release/MySql.Data.dll -gacdir /usr/lib/mono/gac I don't have a problem. Is there a problem with how rpm passes information to the likes of gacutil or am I just doing something wrong? TTFN Paul (this is for bug 177512) -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 11:22:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 06:22:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181122.k0IBMNk4028883@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 06:22 EST ------- I see no one else picked this up in the meantime; Changing bug to FE-REVIEW Looking at the spec file its still confusing to find the %define's, but i know its to keep it close to the JPackage one, so thats ok :-) Groups and everything look good from the get-go too Summary: Its usually not needed to include the %{name} in it, rpm tools (or even rpm -q) would display this name already before the summary, i think better would be just: "Command Line Interface for Java" It builds and mock builds cleanly (fc-devel-i386) rpmlint output is quiet. It does have some files listed twice, rpmbuild says: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/gcj/jakarta-commons-cli warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/gcj/jakarta-commons-cli/jakarta-commons-cli-1.0.jar.db warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/gcj/jakarta-commons-cli/jakarta-commons-cli-1.0.jar.so It would be safe to make your files section: %files %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc LICENSE.txt README.txt %{_javadir}/* %{_libdir}/gcj/%{name} That way it automaticly owns the directory, and picks up all the files inside of it. File permissions look good to me, so no need for %attr magic Formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output / complaints - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (Apache) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - ** Error: duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - ** Directory-ownerships is ok, but needs rework to fix duplicate files - Not a gui app so no desktop file handling needed Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets, or scriplets at all - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds cleanly If you could fix the 2 above mentioned issues (summary & %files section) i think we'll be done with this in no time, nice to see your getting the hang of this packaging thing :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 11:28:29 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:28:29 +0000 Subject: gacutil in a spec file In-Reply-To: <1137582568.1391.17.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1137582568.1391.17.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43CE265D.2050301@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I have the following line in a spec file for mysql-connector-net > > gacutil -i %{name}-{version}/bin/mono-1.0/release/MySql.Data.dll -gacdir > %{buildroot}/usr/lib/mono/gac > > When I do a binary build, the build fails at this point. However, if I > enter from the command line > > gacutil > -i /home/paul/rpmbuild/BUILD/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7/bin/mono-1.0/release/MySql.Data.dll -gacdir /usr/lib/mono/gac > > I don't have a problem. The spec file has a relative directory reference to the MySql.Data.dll file, whereas your command line uses an absolute directory reference. I suspect gacutil is not being run from the directory you think it is. Try: gacutil -i bin/mono-1.0/release/MySql.Data.dll -gacdir %{buildroot}/usr/lib/mono/gac Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 12:37:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181237.k0ICbtle008431@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From thomas at apestaart.org 2006-01-18 07:37 EST ------- I was surprised that tracd was removed from the package. It is definately confusing for end users who get pointed to it, and tracd is definately easier to configure than through apache (I've set up a lot of tracs at work, and I still get thrown by the various complexities added through apache). Could the removal of tracd be reconsidered ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 12:57:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:57:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181257.k0ICvLTD010938@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From thomas at apestaart.org 2006-01-18 07:57 EST ------- Also, I added this line locally to trac.conf: Alias /trac/ "/usr/share/trac/htdocs/" Without it, my trac is missing all of the UI (images, CSS, ...). I personally have htdocs_location = /trac/ in all my trac.ini files. How did you have it configured to work out of the 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 13:06:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:06:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181306.k0ID6Iol012070@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-18 08:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #22) > Could the removal of tracd be reconsidered ? yes, tracd has been re-added in 0.9.3-4 by user demand. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 13:14:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:14:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173979] Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181314.k0IDERNO013172@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Licq - A graphical ICQ Client for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173979 ------- Additional Comments From pvrabec at redhat.com 2006-01-18 08:14 EST ------- I'd like to build FC4 branch as soon as 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 13:22:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:22:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181322.k0IDMQa2014385@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-18 08:22 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/mono/testing/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-4.src.rpm Changelog --------- Altered spec file in accordance to Paul H's advice as well as altering a few minor other bits. This works happily under x86_64 and 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 13:31:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:31:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181331.k0IDVpbb015643@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-18 08:31 EST ------- That's me again ;-) I've forgot to mention, that BR libxml2 is not necessary (it's a dependency of kdebase). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 13:37:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:37:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181337.k0IDbkhO016975@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-18 08:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > I see no one else picked this up in the meantime; Changing bug to FE-REVIEW Thanks! Updated files here: Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/jakarta-commons-cli-1.0-6jpp_5.src.rpm Note that I found a copy of the SRPM recently removed from development core and integrated the changelog into this one, which is why the release jumped from 1 to 5. There was really only one change in that SRPM, which was to remove the Vendor and Distributor tags. > Summary: Its usually not needed to include the %{name} in it, rpm tools (or even > rpm -q) would display this name already before the summary, i think better would > be just: > "Command Line Interface for Java" Done. > It would be safe to make your files section: Done. Thanks! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 13:44:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:44:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181344.k0IDif3G018559@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 08:44 EST ------- Changes look great, here's the completed formal review list: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - rpmlint has no output - Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence (Apache Software Licence) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No need for ldconfig - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section anymore - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - Directory-ownerships is ok now - Not a gui app so no desktop file handling needed Should items: - Includes upstream licence file (COPYING) - No insane scriplets, or scriplets at all - No unnescesarry requires - Mock builds cleanly FE-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 Wed Jan 18 13:53:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:53:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181353.k0IDrMqT020223@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 rmo at sunnmore.net 2006-01-18 08:53 EST ------- asterisk, zaptel and libpri 1.2.2 has been released :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 14:13:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:13:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167983] Review Request: evolution-caldav In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181413.k0IEDn1O023547@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 09:13 EST ------- Above mentioned errors have not been addressed yet, plus building on fedora-core-devel-i386 (evolution 2.5.4-6) fails on ./configure: checking Evolution version... configure: error: Evolution development libraries not installed error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.85097 (%build) If its a dead bug could you close it, otherwise try to address the mentioned 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 14:23:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:23:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172140] Review Request: libmal: a convenience library for malsync In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181423.k0IENitb025183@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libmal: a convenience library for malsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172140 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 09:23 EST ------- Still looking for a reviewer? I'd be willing to pick it up. I see upstream has a new version (0.40), want to update it to that version or want the review to be for this 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 Jan 18 14:36:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:36:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178142] Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181436.k0IEab6K027523@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Jakarta Commons CLI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178142 green at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-18 09:36 EST ------- Thanks. AG. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jamatos at fc.up.pt Wed Jan 18 11:04:06 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:04:06 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> Message-ID: <200601181104.06656.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 14:16, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > Does grace require fftw 2.x, or can it work with 3.x? The 3.x releases > of fftw are maintained by me in Extras as fftw3. I wouldn't mind seeing > the old one go away if nobody needs it and making fftw3 -> fftw. The > fftw 3.x series has been around for over 2 1/2 years. At what point does > it make sense to move the old fftw to a name like fftw2? Are there any > conventions for this sort of thing? FWIW and being consistent with other recent changes the best move would have been for fftw to have become fftw2 as soon as version 3 was declare stable. All the development for this library is happening in version 3, where release 3.1 is entering beta phase. So let us request the change, for you it should be enough to Obsolete fftw3, no? Then we need to change accordingly the packages that require fftw to require fftw2 and those requiring fftw3 to fftw. Since packages should only build require the -devel version if we synchronize our releases all will still work. Does this sounds like a plan? > -Quentin -- Jos? Ab?lio From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 15:02:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:02:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181502.k0IF2pAO032699@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-18 10:02 EST ------- Please don't forget to assign it to yourself when you approve a package 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 Jochen at herr-schmitt.de Wed Jan 18 15:54:19 2006 From: Jochen at herr-schmitt.de (Jochen Schmitt) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:54:19 +0100 Subject: OpenVZ? In-Reply-To: <3237e4410601171734l1e25b21al6d008a0237627f06@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410601171734l1e25b21al6d008a0237627f06@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0MKxQS-1EzFel08hT-0000ft@mrelayeu.kundenserver.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:34:16 -0600, you wrote: >Whats all this about? > >http://news.com.com/Companies+push+Linux+partitioning+effort/2100-1016_3-6027219.html > > -Mike > <> > I think HTML mails are not welcome here. Please check the configureation of your MUA. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.2 (Build 2424) iQA/AwUBQ85k4k9gByurcX4MEQJ/qQCeJIur1ygO1m4/Qv5K8wHFks8yjbcAoLcp N8O11M3US9+YLWzykCBW/ksr =XdPg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 17:18:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:18:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181718.k0IHIUBA030656@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-18 12:18 EST ------- > I still see a file being created in the spec file: > ... > cat <>src/config/torrc.sample.in There won't be a file *created* but an existing one be modified. I do not see how this can be done shorter or clearer with a separate SOURCE > It uses a harcoded user/group id of 19... Regarding the uid, please see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageUserRegistry http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageUserCreation > Actually, libevent is no longer statically linked. But it still > needs a Requires: An explicit Requires: for libevent is not needed because of: | $ rpm -qR tor | ... | libevent-1.1a.so.1 > I dont think circular dependancies are cool... Circular dependencies can not be avoided, Fedora Core is full of them and rpm/smart/yum works fine with them. They are needed because: a) tor needs some init-scripts b) the init-scripts need the tor daemon Because different init-methods are possible which bring in non-trivial dependencies the init-scripts are in separate subpackages. > source1 (the gpg signature) is defined but not used. it should > probably either not be defined, or it should be used to actualy gpg > check the source file in the prep stage. It makes no sense to check the GPG signature in %prep. The buildsystem does know neither the associated gpg key, nor does it define the trust. The shipped GPG signature is for reviewers only who want to verify the tarball. > Missing chkconfig --add / --delete in %post, %prun, %postun The -lsb subpackage has the needed Requires(...): to register/unregister the lsb initscript. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Wed Jan 18 17:31:46 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:31:46 -0700 Subject: buildsys woes Message-ID: <20060118173150.07377350026@ningauble.scrye.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greetings. Seems the buildsys has been locking up pretty regularly of late. ignacio on the #fedora-extras channel mentioned that he was seeing mock builds also lock up. So, I pulled down fedora-extras cvs last night and fired off a job to run a 'make mockbuild' for each package on my devel test machine. Indeed, it had locked up this morning. It looks like somehow mock-yum's groupinstall had installed the net-tools rpm, but then tried to install it again (another thread?) and they got stuck trying to lock the rpm db. (see the two fd's open on the net-tools rpm?). Perhaps it got stuck reading from the rpm pipe that it had already installed? I don't know enough about mock/yum internals to say. it's worth noting all the jobs on the buildsys I have seen that are causing it to stick are development jobs. This points to yum or mock in development. Have they changed recently? Anything else on the build systems changed recently? Hopefully this info will help someone fix the buildsys. ;) This is on a test box here, if anyone would like further info, catch me on #fedora-extras. I can leave it in the stuck state, run further commands, provide remote access for developers, etc. kevin - -- extras 12760 0.0 0.1 3740 844 pts/3 S 08:16 0:00 make mockbuild extras 12854 0.0 1.2 15360 6452 pts/3 S 08:16 0:00 /usr/bin/python -tt /usr/bin/mock -r fedora-5-i386-core.cfg --resultdir=/home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1_3-2_fc5 /home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1.3-2.fc5.src.rpm extras 12884 0.0 0.2 4332 1060 pts/3 S 08:16 0:00 sh -c { /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root groupinstall build; } 2>&1 root 12892 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 08:18 0:00 [pdflush] root 13495 0.0 0.2 4668 1184 pts/3 S 08:29 0:00 su root 13497 0.0 0.2 4516 1516 pts/3 S 08:29 0:00 bash root 12885 0.9 14.3 82312 74128 pts/3 S 08:16 1:13 /usr/bin/python /usr/libexec/mock-yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root groupinstall build ls -lt /proc/12885/fd total 31 lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 24 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Sigmd5 lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 25 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Sha1header lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 26 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Filemd5s lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 27 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Triggername lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 28 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Pubkeys lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 29 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Conflictname l-wx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 30 -> pipe:[2541345] lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 10 -> /var/cache/yum/local/primary.xml.gz.sqlite lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 11 -> /var/cache/yum/groups/primary.xml.gz.sqlite lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 12 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Name lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 13 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Basenames lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 14 -> /var/lib/rpm/__db.000 lr-x------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 15 -> /var/cache/yum/core/packages/net-tools-1.60-60.i386.rpm lr-x------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 16 -> /var/cache/yum/core/packages/net-tools-1.60-60.i386.rpm lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 17 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Group lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 18 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Requirename lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 19 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Providename lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 20 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Dirnames lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 21 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Requireversion lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 22 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Provideversion lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 23 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Installtid lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 3 -> /home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1_3-2_fc5/root.log lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 4 -> /home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1_3-2_fc5/build.log l-wx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 5 -> /var/log/yum.log lr-x------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 6 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Packages lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 7 -> /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm/Packages lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 8 -> /var/cache/yum/core/primary.xml.gz.sqlite lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 9 -> /var/cache/yum/extras/primary.xml.gz.sqlite lrwx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 0 -> /dev/pts/3 l-wx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 1 -> pipe:[2541345] l-wx------ 1 root extras 64 Jan 18 08:31 2 -> pipe:[2541345] rpm --root /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root -qi net-tools Name : net-tools Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 1.60 Vendor: Red Hat, Inc. Release : 60 Build Date: Tue 17 Jan 2006 05:08:51 AM MST Install Date: Wed 18 Jan 2006 08:20:58 AM MST Build Host: ls20-bc1-13.build.redhat.com Group : System Environment/Base Source RPM: net-tools-1.60-60.src.rpm Size : 745942 License: GPL Signature : (none) Packager : Red Hat, Inc. Summary : Basic networking tools. Description : The net-tools package contains basic networking tools, including ifconfig, netstat, route, and others. cat root.log ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/state Cleaning Root ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/state ensuring dir /home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1_3-2_fc5 ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/state ensuring dir /home/extras/extras/devel/autossh/autossh-1_3-2_fc5 ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/lib/rpm ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/log ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/dev ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/etc/rpm ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/tmp ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/var/tmp ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/etc/yum.repos.d ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/proc ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/dev/pts ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/proc ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root/dev/pts /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root groupinstall build -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQFDznuF3imCezTjY0ERApU3AJ9ni+SPQ0PdrfyuAm8Ko5gP0ZIVXgCgjD/y qJX0bbBjsXNjJa3SLZfCZ/Q= =b2dx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 18:30:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:30:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] New: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor 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=178230 Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tcallawa at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/oneko.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/oneko-1.2-1.src.rpm Description: A cat (neko) chases the cursor (now a mouse) around the screen while you work. Alternatively, a dog chases a bone. Note to reviewers: This package is for FC-5. If you want to build for FC-4, you'd need to replace all the BuildRequires with: xorg-x11-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 Wed Jan 18 18:56:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:56:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181856.k0IIuGkN019077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |wart at kobold.org ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-18 13:56 EST ------- To build on FC-4 you must also change the binary location in %files: %{_exec_prefix}/X11R6/bin/oneko I'll do a formal review later today once my devel box is available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 19:21:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:21:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181921.k0IJLb3d027405@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-18 14:21 EST ------- Thanks Ralf, valid comments. I don't know the answers off the top of my head but I can provide some further background. The purpose of this submission is to support GDAL (which is currently trying to get approved). GDAL includes an internal copy of libgeotiff. The debian folks don't have a separate libgeotiff package, they distribute GDAL with the internal libgeotiff. However, reading the Fedora guidelines, it appears that the preference is not to use "hidden" packages where possible - hence this submission. Note also that the proj package also uses the epsg data and is currently part of Extras. I assume the same issue will affect that 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 Jan 18 19:21:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:21:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181921.k0IJLeWN027426@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-18 14:21 EST ------- http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k.spec http://manta.univ.gda.pl/~mgarski/fe/smb4k-0.6.5-4.src.rpm - Remove libxml2 from BR - Add workaround for broken libtool archive (made by Dawid Gajownik) Thanks for workaround, I'm also autotools newbie. I'm compile smb4k with this two options on my FC4 box and it's also went fine. But setting --enable-final for digikam and krusader caused strange errors on rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Matt_Domsch at dell.com Wed Jan 18 19:28:22 2006 From: Matt_Domsch at dell.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:28:22 -0600 Subject: buildsys woes In-Reply-To: <20060118173150.07377350026@ningauble.scrye.com> References: <20060118173150.07377350026@ningauble.scrye.com> Message-ID: <20060118192822.GA7473@lists.us.dell.com> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:31:46AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > it's worth noting all the jobs on the buildsys I have seen that are > causing it to stick are development jobs. This points to yum or mock > in development. Have they changed recently? Anything else on the build > systems changed recently? It got wedged for me twice yesterday building i810switch for FC-4, but then completed after being kicked. -- 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 dcbw at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 19:38:20 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:38:20 -0500 Subject: Build system maintenance Message-ID: <1137613101.6161.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, I'm attempting to track down the hanging problems with openssl, so the buildsystem will be down for a bit. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 19:36:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:36:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181936.k0IJaUX1032455@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-18 14:36 EST ------- (In reply to comment #23) > How did you have it configured to work out of the box ? Obviously it's not really doable completely out of the box especially with pre-existing trac envs because of varying paths to them, but for example like this (yes, ugly, but to demonstrate) works with very minimal configuration: svnadmin create /tmp/svn trac-admin /tmp/trac initenv # accept all defaults except set svn dir tracd --port 8000 /tmp/trac ...and with httpd, just follow the instructions in /etc/httpd/conf.d/trac.conf and ensure that apache has enough permissions to the trac env. No problems with images, css etc with either tracd or httpd. trac.ini not touched at all, it's the one that trac-admin creates out of the box. htdocs_location is not in that file at 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 ianburrell at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 19:43:22 2006 From: ianburrell at gmail.com (Ian Burrell) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:43:22 -0800 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: On 1/18/06, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > I would take lcms (because its needed for wine and koffice which I both maintain). > lcms has been moved to Core in rawhide. I think it is needed by mono. - Ian From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 19:45:24 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:15:24 +0530 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <43CE9AD4.1060005@redhat.com> Ian Burrell wrote: >On 1/18/06, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > >>I would take lcms (because its needed for wine and koffice which I both maintain). >> >> >> > >lcms has been moved to Core in rawhide. I think it is needed by mono. > > - Ian > > You are right. It is required by mono. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 19:50:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:50:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601181950.k0IJoqFa004782@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-18 14:50 EST ------- Ping? If you don't have time for this, I can take over the submission. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 20:03:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182003.k0IK3pXG008020@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-01-18 15:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #25) Also, see http://projects.edgewall.com/trac/wiki/TracOnFedoraCore > (In reply to comment #23) > > How did you have it configured to work out of the box ? > > Obviously it's not really doable completely out of the box especially with > pre-existing trac envs because of varying paths to them, but for example like > this (yes, ugly, but to demonstrate) works with very minimal configuration: > > svnadmin create /tmp/svn > trac-admin /tmp/trac initenv # accept all defaults except set svn dir > tracd --port 8000 /tmp/trac > > ...and with httpd, just follow the instructions in /etc/httpd/conf.d/trac.conf > and ensure that apache has enough permissions to the trac env. No problems with > images, css etc with either tracd or httpd. trac.ini not touched at all, it's > the one that trac-admin creates out of the box. htdocs_location is not in that > file at 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 20:04:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182004.k0IK4qse008268@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-18 15:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) >> >> Builds ok under devel. >> Doesn't build on fc4 due to modular X and unavailable gnome packages, >> I assume it's just targeted at devel and beyond. > >Yes, the base package requires gnome-vfs2-devel >= 2.12 and libgnomeui-devel >= >2.12. FC4 only has 2.10. The modular X dependency could be worked around but I >doubt that FC4 will ever get a newer version of Gnome. No problem there. Just targeting devel is fine. >> NEEDINFO MUST items: >> >> 1 - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. >> >> filesystem package owns /usr/libexec. I guess it's safe to assume filesystem is >> installed, but >> perhaps it should have a explicit requires for it? Any comments on that? If you are installing a file into /usr/libexec and the filesystem rpm isn't installed, no one will own that directory. >> Should this package have a .desktop file since it's got a applet? > >I don't think that a .desktop file would be useful since it's just an applet. >The applet shows up in the "Add to Panel" dialog (right click on a panel and >then select "Add to Panel..."). ok. Sounds fine. >> W: byzanz summary-ended-with-dot A desktop recorder. >> Should remove . on the end of summary. > >Will fix in the next version. Looks good. Thanks. >> I only have a x86 test box. I assume it will build ok on other arches. > >I builds in mock on i386/devel and x86_64/devel. Good. >> I am getting a segfault when I run the application on my devel test machine. >> I was running inside a vnc session, but tried both Xfce and gnome. >> (I don't have a monitor on my test box right at the moment). >> >> [...] >> >> Let me know if I can provide any more information on tracking the segfault down. > >This could be related to the use of VNC. We probably need to bring this >segfault to the attention of the author (Benjamin Otte). It works in the few >tests that I did on i386/devel system. > >I'll post updated packages in a bit. Let me know if I can assit in tracking down the vnc related segfault. If a few other folks could confirm that it's working under regular X that would be good. I can try and lug a monitor up to my test box at some point and try it out. The only other outstanding issue I see is the (possible) filesystem dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 20:15:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:15:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182015.k0IKFvgb010822@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-18 15:15 EST ------- * Sun Dec 25 2005 Enrico Scholz - 0.41-0 - updated to 0.41 http://ensc.de/fedora/smart.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/smart-0.41-0.1.src.rpm ================= sorry, I have some patches where is some disagreement about them and where I would like some upstream feedback from Gustavo. But ok, try the release above... @comment #30 ============ -uigtk + -uitext subpackages were my initial idea and they would meet your 'smart-gui-gtk' suggestion in some way. But people did not liked this naming so it was reduced to plain '-gtk'... GUI is not GUI (gtk apps do not work fine in non-gnome environments), so I like it when the used toolkit is visible in the package name. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From qspencer at ieee.org Wed Jan 18 20:42:18 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:42:18 -0600 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <200601181104.06656.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601171249.22946.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43CCFC48.3050408@ieee.org> <200601181104.06656.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <43CEA82A.6050102@ieee.org> Jose' Matos wrote: >On Tuesday 17 January 2006 14:16, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > >>Does grace require fftw 2.x, or can it work with 3.x? The 3.x releases >>of fftw are maintained by me in Extras as fftw3. I wouldn't mind seeing >>the old one go away if nobody needs it and making fftw3 -> fftw. The >>fftw 3.x series has been around for over 2 1/2 years. At what point does >>it make sense to move the old fftw to a name like fftw2? Are there any >>conventions for this sort of thing? >> >> > > FWIW and being consistent with other recent changes the best move would have >been for fftw to have become fftw2 as soon as version 3 was declare stable. > > I agree, but I introduced fftw3 because there was no interest on the part of the maintainer of fftw of moving to the 3.x releases. FWIW, Debian has a fftw3 package. > All the development for this library is happening in version 3, where >release 3.1 is entering beta phase. > > So let us request the change, for you it should be enough to Obsolete fftw3, >no? > > Then we need to change accordingly the packages that require fftw to require >fftw2 and those requiring fftw3 to fftw. Since packages should only build >require the -devel version if we synchronize our releases all will still >work. > >Does this sounds like a plan? > > This seems reasonble. Currently, fftw3 is only in the FC-4 and devel branches. This is because the main reason I wanted it in Extras was for Octave, which was still in core for FC3. I don't see any particular need to change everything in FC-4, so maybe we just make the changes in devel so that they will be in place for FC-5? If we were to make this change, here are the packages that require fftw: fftw-devel grace (It also appears glame on livna would be affected.) Here are the packages that currently require fftw3: fftw3-devel octave octave-forge osiv plplot-octave I maintain octave and octave-forge, and having looked at the others, it appears the plplot dependency is implicit, so the only other package needing an update is osiv. -Quentin From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 18 20:54:39 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:54:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060118205439.4957A7FD2@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 5 dejavu-fonts-2.2-3.fc3 fyre-1.0.0-11.fc3 mlmmj-1.2.10-1.fc3 mod_security-1.9.2-1.fc3 python-docutils-0.4-1.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 Jan 18 20:54:45 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:54:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060118205445.BD7ED7FD2@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 dejavu-fonts-2.2-3.fc4 fyre-1.0.0-11.fc4 i810switch-0.6.5-1.fc4 mlmmj-1.2.10-1.fc4 mod_security-1.9.2-1.fc4 perl-Convert-UUlib-1.06-2.fc4 python-docutils-0.4-1.fc4 streamtuner-0.99.99-11.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 Wed Jan 18 20:54:59 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:54:59 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060118205459.43CB17FD2@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 17 bash-completion-20050721-3.fc5 fyre-1.0.0-12.fc5 gfontview-0.5.0-4.1.fc5 gkrellm-themes-2.1.9-3 i810switch-0.6.5-1 jakarta-commons-cli-1.0-6jpp_5.fc5 libopensync-plugin-evolution2-0.18-4.fc5 mlmmj-1.2.10-1.fc5 mod_security-1.9.2-1.fc5 perl-Convert-UUlib-1.06-2.fc5 php-json-1.1.0-2.fc5 python-docutils-0.4-1.fc5 rpmlint-0.71-3.fc5 streamtuner-0.99.99-11.fc5 sylpheed-claws-2.0.0-0.rc4.fc5 synce-trayicon-0.9.0-5.fc5 torsmo-0.18-4.fc5 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 Wed Jan 18 21:13:22 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:13:22 -0600 Subject: Nvu? Message-ID: According to the list archives, about ten months ago there were a few people working to get Nvu into extras. Unfortunately it doesn't look like a package actually made it into extras. Is there still any interest in getting Nvu into extras? - J< From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 21:19:03 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:49:03 +0530 Subject: Nvu? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43CEB0C7.9080708@redhat.com> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >According to the list archives, about ten months ago there were a few >people working to get Nvu into extras. Unfortunately it doesn't look >like a package actually made it into extras. > >Is there still any interest in getting Nvu into extras? > > - J< > > Havent seen any discussions happening. Go for it. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From tibbs at math.uh.edu Wed Jan 18 21:44:32 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:44:32 -0600 Subject: Nvu? In-Reply-To: <43CEB0C7.9080708@redhat.com> (Rahul Sundaram's message of "Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:49:03 +0530") References: <43CEB0C7.9080708@redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: RS> Havent seen any discussions happening. Go for it. A great idea in theory, but in practice I think I'm a bit out of my league. I know there were specfiles floating about, but none seem to be for Nvu 1.0. The tantalizing bit from the archives: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-March/msg00097.html from Christopher Aillon (who I understand is Red Hat's Mozilla man) stating that he was working on a package kind of put an end to the discussion. I hope he doesn't mind a CC. Anyway, given something to start with, I'm happy to put in some work, but I have no hope of packaging Nvu from scratch. - J< From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Jan 18 21:52:59 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:52:59 +0100 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CE9AD4.1060005@redhat.com> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> <43CE9AD4.1060005@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43CEB8BB.20407@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ian Burrell wrote: > >> lcms has been moved to Core in rawhide. I think it is needed by mono. >> >> - Ian >> >> > You are right. It is required by mono. > > That still leaves fc4 and fc3 :)... for now... - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDzri7QEQyPsWM8csRAvu5AJ9hxm2KUPpJIcVo8lEDy9DuYU0tagCfRgBb zRyeyCMFU3SypUqaLAvelYs= =6eOa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 22:15:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:15:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] New: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization 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=178263 Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization 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: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: orion at cora.nwra.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ncarg.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ncarg-4.4.1-1.src.rpm Description: NCAR Graphics is a Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 22:41:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:41:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182241.k0IMf0du008387@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-18 17:40 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.2-1.2.6.15_1.1860_FC5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.2-1.2.6.15_1.1860_FC5.src.rpm * Wed Jan 18 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-1 - Update to 1.2.2. - Add a couple of patches for 2.6.16-rc1 compatibility. - Change to fedora-kmodhelper-style 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 Jan 18 22:42:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:42:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182242.k0IMgB5c008580@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-18 17:42 EST ------- Update Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.1-1.src.rpm * Wed Jan 18 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-2 - Bump release number. * Wed Jan 18 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-1 - Update to 1.2.2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 22:48:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:48:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182248.k0IMmvTD009572@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 Christian.Iseli at licr.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-18 17:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Thanks for the quick updates! Package is FE-ACCEPTED Thanks for the quick review :-) I changed the blocker... > Please cvs-import, make tag, make build Done. > and after this assign the bug to me please Was already done :) > and close with NEXTRELEASE as resolution. 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 Wed Jan 18 23:01:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:01:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182301.k0IN1f1V011533@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-18 18:01 EST ------- Ed - I posted this just a bit too soon and it doesn't build yet. Note that this only builds on devel due to a bug fixed in gfortran-4.1.0 but not it 4.0.1. I'll post an update when I've got a working version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 23:12:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:12:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182312.k0INCXDQ012783@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 18:12 EST ------- Woops sorry for that can't believe i forgot to change blocker bug. Happy .. umm .. dna sequencing? :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 18 23:18:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:18:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176780] Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182318.k0INIbpA013704@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wp_tray: A wallpaper utility that sits in the Notification Area https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176780 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 18:18 EST ------- I remeber seeing import logs for this, did you make tag && make build? Bug is still waiting for being closed as "NEXTRELEASE" for when it is :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Wed Jan 18 23:11:36 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:11:36 -0800 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137435780.2801.93.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060116005549.3e3323cd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1137426012.2801.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137434366.3612.31.camel@localhost> <1137435780.2801.93.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137625896.4094.34.camel@localhost> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 19:23 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 09:59 -0800 schrieb Toshio Kuratomi: >> Someone has to commit to fixing the package if it breaks > > or has security holes through the FC release cycle. [...] > > This directly leads to another problem: We either need to drop all > orphaned packages at the point where the maintainer steps down *or* we > need a orphaned-packages-task-force that maintains orphaned packages in > the trees where they were shipped (example: if foo was shipped in > extras/4 and is orphaned now we either remove it now or somebody has to > maintain it from now on until FC4 is EOL) Or 3) there's a security-task-force which watches for securiy problems and kicks orphaned packages when security is known to be compromised. -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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 18 23:39:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:39:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601182339.k0INdEk5017677@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-18 18:39 EST ------- Hi Orion, no worries! I'll review when you say its 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 Thu Jan 19 00:13:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:13:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190013.k0J0DN5o022177@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-18 19:13 EST ------- Hey orion, > I posted this just a bit too soon and it doesn't build yet. Note that this > only builds on devel due to a bug fixed in gfortran-4.1.0 but not it 4.0.1. > I'll post an update when I've got a working version. Why not just get it in for devel tree only at this tree. If the build issues are really due to bugs in the compiler, those gfortran fixes may never get backported to 4.0.1; unless I don't quite get what you mean. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 00:31:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:31:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190031.k0J0VfXh024093@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-18 19:31 EST ------- A usefull speci file trick is the %exclude tag, with it you can probably simplify your %files section down to: %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc COPYING Copyright README %{_sysconfdir}/profile.d/ncarg.*sh %{_bindir}/* %{_libdir}/ncarg %{_mandir}/man*/*.gz %exclude %{_bindir}/ncargcc %exclude %{_bindir}/ncargf90 %exclude %{_libdir}/*.a %exclude %{_libdir}/ncarg/examples %exclude %{_libdir}/ncarg/tests %files devel %{_bindir}/ncargcc %{_bindir}/ncargf90 %{_includedir}/ncarg %{_libdir}/*.a %{_libdir}/ncarg/examples %{_libdir}/ncarg/tests Saves a few pages of listing binaries and takes care of all directory ownership etc properly too -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 02:51:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190251.k0J2pG7H008258@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-18 21:51 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.2-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/libpri-1.2.2-1.src.rpm * Wed Jan 18 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-1 - Update to 1.2.2. - Fix the spelling of Paul Komkoff Jr.'s name. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 03:03:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:03:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190303.k0J33R3K009971@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-18 22:03 EST ------- MUST items: - rpmlint output is clean - name is appropriate - spec filename matches package name - macro use in spec file is consistent (other than /usr/include; see below) - Build root is correct - Summary and description are ok. - No static libs - Desktop file looks ok and is installed correctly. - RPM_OPT_FLAGS passed to make. - Not relocatable - Contains code, not content - Package does not create any directories that it should own. - spec file is in english and is legible - Compiles and builds on devel (did not test in mock) - No shared libraries - No duplicate %files - Permissions set correctly - No -devel package needed SHOULD items: - No license file included. Please query upstream to include one, even if it just says that the software is public domain. - Builds on x86_64-FC4 (with noted changes) and i386-FC5 - Packages runs on both architectures Non-blocking issues: %{?_smp_mflags} not passed to make, but there is only one file to compile so it would have no effect. The tarball includes a japanese manpage. Why not include that in the package? The application itself has some small problems that should be reported upstream: 1) There is no way to turn off oneko. Once it's started, it runs until you log out of X or /usr/bin/kill it manually. I suspect that this was the purpose of the (removed) BSD daemon. 2) If you /usr/bin/kill oneko, the root window cursor reverts to an 'X', not a diagonal-arrow as is the default for gnome. Source does not match upstream due to the removal of the copyrighted images. All other files were verified the same with 'diff'. MUSTFIX: * Several of the included documentation files are in Japanese. This should probably be indicated in the filename somehow. * The 'make' line in the specfile uses "-I /usr/include". Please change this to"-I %{_includedir}". * The patch to the manpage has a grammatical problem: "a cat wite tiger-like stripe" should be "a cat with tiger-like stripes" The manpage has other grammatical problems that I'm willing to ignore, but this line was explicitly fixed by the patch, so it should at least be grammatically correct. :) * BR: xorg-x11-proto-devel is redundant since it's required by libX11-devel. * 'install' is missing '-p' Questions: The spec file says the license is "Public Domain", but I could not find reference to any license information in the tarball or on the website. Is this the proper license to use if the author hasn't specified one? Have you asked upstream what kind of license it falls under? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 04:56:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:56:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176613] Review Request: Nagios - System / network monitoring application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190456.k0J4uZWM027916@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 - System / network monitoring application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176613 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-18 23:56 EST ------- Looks good to me. 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 rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 19 05:29:12 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:29:12 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-HTML-Mason/devel .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 perl-HTML-Mason.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <200601110101.k0B111V5007072@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601110101.k0B111V5007072@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137648553.5272.367.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:00 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote: > Author: steve > Index: perl-HTML-Mason.spec > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-HTML-Mason/devel/perl-HTML-Mason.spec,v > retrieving revision 1.2 > retrieving revision 1.3 > diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 > --- perl-HTML-Mason.spec 16 Sep 2005 20:17:49 -0000 1.2 > +++ perl-HTML-Mason.spec 11 Jan 2006 01:00:28 -0000 1.3 > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > Name: perl-HTML-Mason > -Version: 1.3101 > -Release: 3%{?dist} > +Version: 1.32 > +Release: 1%{?dist} This change doesn't work. RPM-wise, version 1.3101 is greater than version 1.32, so people won't ever see this update. Ralf From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 19 08:15:44 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:15:44 +0100 Subject: ... However, no Job ID was provided in the time required Message-ID: <1137658545.5272.394.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Hi, Subject says all .... buildsys is broken once again. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 08:21:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 03:21:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178021] Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601190821.k0J8L73o018791@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SIBsim4 - Align expressed RNA sequences on a DNA template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178021 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-19 03:21 EST ------- np We don't do much sequencing here. Mainly data storage, distribution, and analysis :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 19 09:21:54 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:21:54 +0000 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor Message-ID: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I've packaged mysql-connector-net-1.0.7 for FE (Bugzilla #177512). It's happily working on an x86 and x86_64 machine at work, but it needs a sponsor. Does anyone fancy having a look-see at it? As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy with Mono to understand how things are done. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 19 10:15:21 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:15:21 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 09:21 +0000, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I've packaged mysql-connector-net-1.0.7 for FE (Bugzilla #177512). It's > happily working on an x86 and x86_64 machine at work, but it needs a > sponsor. > > Does anyone fancy having a look-see at it? > > As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy > with Mono to understand how things are done. Are you sure on the legal situation? Unless, the FF, RH or FESCO can explains what has changed about the legal position on Mono with regard to Fedora, I would rather avoid the legal risks of packaging any mono package into Fedora. Ralf From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Jan 19 10:31:54 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:31:54 +0000 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy > > with Mono to understand how things are done. > Are you sure on the legal situation? > > Unless, the FF, RH or FESCO can explains what has changed about the > legal position on Mono with regard to Fedora, I would rather avoid the > legal risks of packaging any mono package into Fedora. Given that avahi-sharp is in rawhide as is beagle and a few others "mono" based packages, inclusion of mysql-connector-net should not be a problem, but then, IANAL. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 11:05:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:05:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] New: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code 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=178310 Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/w3c-libwww.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/w3c-libwww-5.4.0-15.src.rpm Description: Libwww is a general-purpose Web API written in C for Unix and Windows (Win32). With a highly extensible and layered API, it can accommodate many different types of applications including clients and robots. The purpose of libwww is to provide a highly optimized HTTP sample implementation, as well as other Internet protocols, and to serve as a testbed for protocol experiments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 11:10:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:10:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177832] Review Request: wmweather+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191110.k0JBAX7m013626@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmweather+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177832 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-19 06:10 EST ------- I have filed #178310 for w3c-libwww inclusion. Once this is approved I will rebuild wmweather+ on 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 19 11:15:20 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:15:20 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 10:31 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > Hi, > > > > As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy > > > with Mono to understand how things are done. > > Are you sure on the legal situation? Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > > Unless, the FF, RH or FESCO can explains what has changed about the > > legal position on Mono with regard to Fedora, I would rather avoid the > > legal risks of packaging any mono package into Fedora. > > Given that avahi-sharp is in rawhide as is beagle and a few others > "mono" based packages, inclusion of mysql-connector-net should not be a > problem, but then, IANAL. Mono is in rawhide and probably will be in FC5 -- if we like that or not is a different question. We have to deal with it. People that don't like these recent happenings have to either live with them or will probably switch to another Distribution without Mono anyway. I don't think we can change the "Mono is now in Fedora" if we forbid mono apps in extras. And it would look rather odd if we have Mono apps in core, but forbid then in Extras. Ralf, please take the above into account. If you still think mono in extras should be forbidden please write a proposal and lay down all the details for your opinion it it. Send it to the list and to me until next Monday and I'll forward it to FESCo. We can vote about it in next Meeting (Thursday next week). We can put all mono apps in extras on hold until then -- that shouldn't be a big deal. CU thl From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Thu Jan 19 12:03:41 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:03:41 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <43CF801D.1040206@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 10:31 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: >> Hi, >> >>>> As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy >>>> with Mono to understand how things are done. >>> Are you sure on the legal situation? > > Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > >>> Unless, the FF, RH or FESCO can explains what has changed about the >>> legal position on Mono with regard to Fedora, I would rather avoid the >>> legal risks of packaging any mono package into Fedora. >> Given that avahi-sharp is in rawhide as is beagle and a few others >> "mono" based packages, inclusion of mysql-connector-net should not be a >> problem, but then, IANAL. > > Mono is in rawhide and probably will be in FC5 -- if we like that or not > is a different question. We have to deal with it. People that don't like > these recent happenings have to either live with them or will probably > switch to another Distribution without Mono anyway. > > I don't think we can change the "Mono is now in Fedora" if we forbid > mono apps in extras. And it would look rather odd if we have Mono apps > in core, but forbid then in Extras. > > Ralf, please take the above into account. If you still think mono in > extras should be forbidden please write a proposal and lay down all the > details for your opinion it it. Send it to the list and to me until next > Monday and I'll forward it to FESCo. We can vote about it in next > Meeting (Thursday next week). We can put all mono apps in extras on hold > until then -- that shouldn't be a big deal. > Erm, I assumed that the mono embargo was lifted and such I've already made und pushed versions of libgda and libgnomedb with the mono bindings enabled (trying to get all my packages in good shape for the mass rebuild) Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 12:05:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:05:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178011] Maintainership of gnome-themes-extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191205.k0JC5eK3022499@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Maintainership of gnome-themes-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178011 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 07:05 EST ------- Closing as a bug was deemed inappropiate -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 12:06:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:06:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178012] Maintainership of themes-backgrounds-gnome In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191206.k0JC6bnA022631@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Maintainership of themes-backgrounds-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178012 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 07:06 EST ------- Closing as a bug was deemed inappropiate -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at camperquake.de Thu Jan 19 12:16:59 2006 From: fedora at camperquake.de (Ralf Ertzinger) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:16:59 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060119131659.41f9d488@dhcp05.addix.net> Hi. > Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." Which, to be blunt, tells us nothing at all. From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Thu Jan 19 12:17:03 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:17:03 +0100 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <43CDFB0E.6090605@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <43CF833F.1080203@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hm, ok also taking treecc... - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDz4M/QEQyPsWM8csRAuJlAKC2xLC69eIBp35ZbwoZk+r24s3GGQCgiiAc EquurZkRopRdrHlcUMAc168= =a/43 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Jan 19 12:27:05 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:27:05 +0000 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <20060119131659.41f9d488@dhcp05.addix.net> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060119131659.41f9d488@dhcp05.addix.net> Message-ID: <1137673625.3050.11.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > > considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > > Which, to be blunt, tells us nothing at all. Actually, it tells you that mono is go and as such, we can package and release mono components in Core and (presumably) Extras. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 19 12:34:46 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:34:46 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <43CF801D.1040206@hhs.nl> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <43CF801D.1040206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1137674086.5923.72.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 13:03 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> We can put all mono apps in extras on hold >> until then -- that shouldn't be a big deal. > > I assumed that the mono embargo was lifted and such I've already made > und pushed versions of libgda and libgnomedb with the mono bindings > enabled (trying to get all my packages in good shape for the mass rebuild) That's okay and no problem afaics. Until now most people simply agreed that mono packages are fine in Extras. And FESCo even talked a bit a about mono it in the last meeting http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060112 We agreed that mono packages are okay in Fedora Extras 5 -- but there was no real vote or special discussion on that topic; is was more a silent agreement that was not spoken out explicit iirc. But now one Fedora Extras packager seems to think packages based on Mono should be forbidden in Extras. FESCo IMHO can't silently ignore that request. So, if this packager really does not want packages based on mono he should get a chance to explain his opinion. He should write it down in a proposal to be discussed on fedora-extras-list and among the FESCo members. FESCo then will discuss or even vote on it. That's how a democratic community project should work IMHO. Or does somebody think this is the wrong approach? But as I wrote in my mail: > > Mono is in rawhide and probably will be in FC5 -- if we like that or not > > is a different question. We have to deal with it. People that don't like > > these recent happenings have to either live with them or will probably > > switch to another Distribution without Mono anyway. > > > > I don't think we can change the "Mono is now in Fedora" if we forbid > > mono apps in extras. And it would look rather odd if we have Mono apps > > in core, but forbid then in Extras. Read this as: "thl don't thinks FESCo will forbid packages based on mono". But maybe I'm wrong on this. CU thl From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Thu Jan 19 12:43:40 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:43:40 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137674086.5923.72.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <43CF801D.1040206@hhs.nl> <1137674086.5923.72.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <43CF897C.8030802@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 13:03 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> We can put all mono apps in extras on hold >>> until then -- that shouldn't be a big deal. >> I assumed that the mono embargo was lifted and such I've already made >> und pushed versions of libgda and libgnomedb with the mono bindings >> enabled (trying to get all my packages in good shape for the mass rebuild) > > That's okay and no problem afaics. Until now most people simply agreed > that mono packages are fine in Extras. And FESCo even talked a bit a > about mono it in the last meeting > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060112 > > We agreed that mono packages are okay in Fedora Extras 5 -- but there > was no real vote or special discussion on that topic; is was more a > silent agreement that was not spoken out explicit iirc. > Thats what I understood too, my mail was just to make sure. > But now one Fedora Extras packager seems to think packages based on Mono > should be forbidden in Extras. > > FESCo IMHO can't silently ignore that request. So, if this packager > really does not want packages based on mono he should get a chance to > explain his opinion. He should write it down in a proposal to be > discussed on fedora-extras-list and among the FESCo members. FESCo then > will discuss or even vote on it. That's how a democratic community > project should work IMHO. Or does somebody think this is the wrong > approach? > Democracy is the right approach, but I dunno if FESCo is the right place for the decission, atleast not without a wide discussion on this list first. (Note: I'm pro mono) Thanks & Regards, Hans From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Thu Jan 19 12:50:21 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:50:21 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137673625.3050.11.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060119131659.41f9d488@dhcp05.addix.net> <1137673625.3050.11.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43CF8B0D.6080205@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > >>>Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business >>>considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being >>>included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." >> >>Which, to be blunt, tells us nothing at all. > > > Actually, it tells you that mono is go and as such, we can package and > release mono components in Core and (presumably) Extras. Maybe it does but I guess what people are wondering about (but do not spell out) is this: Why was this decision made without talking to FESCo and the FE community? All this silent stuff that went on behind our backs (just stressing ;) ). This statement is what it is basically nothing. I don't think that we need to know everything about what maybe went on in legal but at least FESCo/FE community deserved to hear from this beforehand. What I would have expected is a mail maybe to the packagers list with a heads up for the FE people that their packages will be pulled into core because mono (for some reason or the other) gets included and so on (see other threads and flames about this). Maybe rejecting mono stuff from extras for now will get us this explanation maybe it won't. I don't know but this maybe the reason for this reaction and other reactions we see. I want to stress that this is simply my understanding of the stuff that is going on atm and _not_ my opinion on the topic... after all I am pro _fedora_. - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDz4sNQEQyPsWM8csRAlA5AJ9BMoRVLQvySD5c3shzcscnU78UGQCfRz65 tQAO4lQdQSrO5sMpO38mfVo= =NoCv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 14:18:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:18:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191418.k0JEIjb8008201@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-19 09:18 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > >> > >> NEEDINFO MUST items: > >> > >> 1 - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. > >> > >> filesystem package owns /usr/libexec. I guess it's safe to assume filesystem is > >> installed, but > >> perhaps it should have a explicit requires for it? > > Any comments on that? If you are installing a file into /usr/libexec > and the filesystem rpm isn't installed, no one will own that directory. The filesystem package is a required part of a Fedora install - you can't have one without it. If you take a look at the requirements chain, filesystem is required by basesystem, and basesystem is required by glibc. So to uninstall filesystem you'd have to uninstall glibc. Since explicit requirements on glibc are not needed, I don't think that we need an explicit requirement on filesystem. > >> I am getting a segfault when I run the application on my devel test machine. > >> I was running inside a vnc session, but tried both Xfce and gnome. > >> (I don't have a monitor on my test box right at the moment). > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> Let me know if I can provide any more information on tracking the segfault down. > > > >This could be related to the use of VNC. We probably need to bring this > >segfault to the attention of the author (Benjamin Otte). It works in the few > >tests that I did on i386/devel system. > > Let me know if I can assit in tracking down the vnc related segfault. > > If a few other folks could confirm that it's working under regular X > that would be good. I can try and lug a monitor up to my test box at some > point and try it out. I talked with the author on IRC ("Company" - usually can be found in #gstreamer on chat.freenode.net). He said that he'd have to get access to the box in question or at least get some more information to diagnose the segfault. Is there anyone else out there that could give this package a try? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From justin.conover at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 14:31:20 2006 From: justin.conover at gmail.com (Justin Conover) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 08:31:20 -0600 Subject: mono apps in extras Message-ID: http://www.nrpms.net/Packages/fedora-4-i386/mono/ Has Matthew Hall looked into pushing some of his mono src.rpms/specs to extras to include some of the work and apps he has already created? Just thought it might be eaiser to push things like monodevelop, banshee, blam and whatever else into extras/core without starting from scratch on the spec files? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 19 14:33:39 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:33:39 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1137681220.5272.450.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 12:15 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 10:31 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > > Hi, > > > > > > As the name suggests, it's a mono based package, so you must be happy > > > > with Mono to understand how things are done. > > > Are you sure on the legal situation? > > Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." To me, this statement is not enough - At least lack of communication. > > > Unless, the FF, RH or FESCO can explains what has changed about the > > > legal position on Mono with regard to Fedora, I would rather avoid the > > > legal risks of packaging any mono package into Fedora. > > > > Given that avahi-sharp is in rawhide as is beagle and a few others > > "mono" based packages, inclusion of mysql-connector-net should not be a > > problem, but then, IANAL. > Ralf, please take the above into account. If you still think mono in > extras should be forbidden please write a proposal and lay down all the > details for your opinion it it. I don't think it should be forbidden (I actually have no opinion on mono nor C#) - All I am asking is: * What on the legal situation has changed in such a way that we are now seeing mono in Core, despite RH has told us for a very long time that it would not be possible for legal reason? The only explanation, I have: Either something must have changed or somebody must have been lying to the community on the legal issues. For the moment, I am presuming the former but am wondering about RH's style of communication. * Is it safe to ship Mono based packages as part of FE, or are FE users, FE contributors, or FESCO at risk of being sued? RH's argumentation so far had been: "No RH can't ship Mono, because RH is at risk of being sued for patent infringement". The SCO case and mp3/css ("The Graf", might ring a bell for you) have taught us, it is not necessarily, the enterprize who is at risk to be sued, it is the user. > Send it to the list and to me until next > Monday and I'll forward it to FESCo. We can vote about it in next > Meeting (Thursday next week). Please do so - But if I were you, I'd consult a lawyer, because as FESCO leader, who will have to act as a speaker on this matter, it's not unlikely it will be you who will be sued - In case there is something to be sued for ;) For me personally, the crucial points are: Without one of the responsible decision takers having elaborated the legal background of Mono, I don't feel in a position to "accept" mono packages and will find anybody doing so acting negligent. Ralf From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Jan 19 14:35:44 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:35:44 +0000 Subject: mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1137681344.3050.18.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 08:31 -0600, Justin Conover wrote: > http://www.nrpms.net/Packages/fedora-4-i386/mono/ > > Has Matthew Hall looked into pushing some of his mono src.rpms/specs > to extras to include some of the work and apps he has already created? I've not seen any bugzilla reports, so I'll say he hasn't. > Just thought it might be eaiser to push things like monodevelop, > banshee, blam and whatever else into extras/core without starting from > scratch on the spec files? Problem is that for FE devel branch and FC5t2, monodevelop and anything else that relies on vte-sharp will currently not build due to a problem with vte itself. I don't think it's the RPM either, but the gnome development branch at fault. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Jan 19 14:50:06 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:50:06 +0000 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <1137681220.5272.450.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1137681220.5272.450.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1137682206.3050.30.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > > considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > > To me, this statement is not enough - At least lack of communication. I will agree there. It would have been nice to have known what went on behind closed doors - it smacks of the corporate world where things "happen" without people knowing rather than the warm and welcoming OSS route where everything is transparent. > I don't think it should be forbidden (I actually have no opinion on mono > nor C#) - All I am asking is: > > * What on the legal situation has changed in such a way that we are now > seeing mono in Core, despite RH has told us for a very long time that it > would not be possible for legal reason? > > The only explanation, I have: Either something must have changed or > somebody must have been lying to the community on the legal issues. I have a feeling that it is either Novell have had some piece of paper or other from the borg saying we won't sue, or that the borg's perverse idea of OSS licences has been accepted or even that MS have submitted SWF and a few other key bits to EMCA for approval which means that they can be implemented by others without risk of litigation. > * Is it safe to ship Mono based packages as part of FE, or are FE users, > FE contributors, or FESCO at risk of being sued? Given the insanity of the patent system in the US, just about everyone is at risk of infringment by firing up Anjuta and doing anything simpler than a "hello world" application! What is slightly more worrying is the terms agreed by contributors for FE - will RH protect the likes of me for packaging mono apps if all goes tits up? > RH's argumentation so far had been: "No RH can't ship Mono, because RH > is at risk of being sued for patent infringement". The SCO case and > mp3/css ("The Graf", might ring a bell for you) have taught us, it is > not necessarily, the enterprize who is at risk to be sued, it is the > user. SCO only went after users as they are softer targets. Big nasty company goes after little user with bully boy extorsion techniques, little user pays up. They went after the likes of RH, IBM, Novell and if hadn't been for the borg and Sun giving them wodges of dosh, they would be nothing more than something you'd wipe off your shoe. CSS is, as someone else has said in reply to me, one of the crackpot bits that the DCMA was actually bought in to protect (some observers even believe it's one of the two reasons why it appeared!) > For me personally, the crucial points are: > > Without one of the responsible decision takers having elaborated the > legal background of Mono, I don't feel in a position to "accept" mono > packages and will find anybody doing so acting negligent. It take a different stance on this to you. I don't believe they are being negligent in the least as the position given by RH themselves both implicit and explicitly is that all that is C# is good to go. If they don't want to explain their actions, then that's up to them - as contributors, we accept the rules they put down and if it all goes bad, then RH take the fall. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Jan 19 14:55:52 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:55:52 +0100 Subject: Package looking for a sponsor In-Reply-To: <43CF8B0D.6080205@lowlatency.de> References: <1137662514.3050.3.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137665722.5272.418.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137666715.3050.8.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1137669320.5923.51.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060119131659.41f9d488@dhcp05.addix.net> <1137673625.3050.11.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <43CF8B0D.6080205@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <1137682552.5272.458.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Paul F. Johnson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > >>>Quoting GregDeKoenigsberg from the Fedora Foundation: "Business > >>>considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > >>>included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > >> > >>Which, to be blunt, tells us nothing at all. > > > > > > Actually, it tells you that mono is go and as such, we can package and > > release mono components in Core and (presumably) Extras. > > Maybe it does but I guess what people are wondering about (but do not spell out) > is this: Why was this decision made without talking to FESCo and the FE > community? You've got it - That's one point. Another point is speculation on "what has changed?". Most significant change on Fedora, recently: The equally sudden emphasize on the "Noncommercial Fedora Foundation". This, combined with the sudden appearance of mono and the GDK statement above gives a nice picture ;) > Maybe rejecting mono stuff from extras for now will get us this explanation > maybe it won't. I don't know but this maybe the reason for this reaction and > other reactions we see. > I want to stress that this is simply my understanding of the stuff that is going > on atm and _not_ my opinion on the topic... after all I am pro _fedora_. So am I, but I can't deny the thought, there might be something "cheesy" going on ... Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 15:01:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:01:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191501.k0JF1h3f015043@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-19 10:01 EST ------- I attach a patch with minor changes. Feel free to discard what you dislike. I am a bit puzzled by the end of the third paragraph in the app subpackage description: The line mode browser is a minimal line mode web browser; often useful to convert to ascii text. Currently unavailable until someone updates it to some new interfaces. (hint, hint...) Is it still true? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 15:07:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:07:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191507.k0JF71D0016217@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-19 10:06 EST ------- I think it could be a good idea to explain why make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool is needed And also why not use %{?_smp_mflags}? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 15:07:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:07:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] New: Review Request: Azureus - a 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=178330 Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: green at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-8.src.rpm Description: Azureus implements the BitTorrent protocol using java language and comes bundled with many invaluable features for both beginners and advanced users. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 15:52:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:52:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191552.k0JFqjuh024774@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-19 10:52 EST ------- I see there's an applet for KDE. Where's smart-gsmarttray? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 15:58:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:58:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191558.k0JFw2Y8025706@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 10:57 EST ------- Andrew Overholt made some suggestions on IRC. New files are here: Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-9.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 Jan 19 16:05:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:05:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191605.k0JG58pZ027777@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 11:04 EST ------- I'll pick it up, i'm almost getting used to this java packaging thing :-) Changing to FE-REVIEW. It builds cleanly on fedora-devel-i386, and functionally it seems well in order too. However during compile i got this message: /usr/bin/build-classpath: error: could not find xml-commons-apis Java extension for this JVM /usr/bin/build-classpath: error: All specified jars were not found Is this a missing BuildRequires? Or an ignorable error? Doing "yum install xml-commons-api" seemed to make it happy again, so it appears to be a missing BuildRequire, if so please add it Spacing in the header of the spec file is a little confused, seems your not using spaces (especially for the patches) but tabs, in different editors this then looks messy; Could you please re-indent it with spaces? It might be better to: install -m644 %{SOURCE2} and 3 instead of copy, this way your always sure the permissions are correct, and same with -m775 for the script **** edit *** I see that you just corrected this in release 9 :-) If you could please look at the above mentioned issues (spacing in header and probable missing build requires) i'll post the formal reviewlist -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 16:09:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:09:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191609.k0JG9kLI028688@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 11:09 EST ------- Ps i see your not using install yet for: mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications cp %{SOURCE2} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/application-registry cp %{SOURCE3} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/application-registry Could you please change this to: mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications install -m644 %{SOURCE2} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/application-registry install -m644 %{SOURCE3} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/application-registry -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 16:17:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:17:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191617.k0JGHhL7030152@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 11:17 EST ------- File permissions of the %doc files come out all wrong too (775, should be 644). You could do a simple chmod 644 below the dos2unix lines to fix this up. Also fedora extra's guidelines say md5sum of the source package should match the one from upstream, but upstream i can't seem to find the _nocrypto source, could you please provide a link to it? If its custom patched, the normal way to do this is thru a patch, and including the original upstream source and patching it on the fly, only exceptions to this i've seen so far is when patents prevent RH from distributing the original source If neither those is the case (not on the upstream download server & can't patch it or script it and not for legal reasons) please at the very least add a comment to the spec file why not, and how people can reproduce this based on future upstream release versions -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 16:18:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:18:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191618.k0JGI93x030236@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-19 11:17 EST ------- I will look into your patch and the issues you mentioned. This was just my first rewrite of the core spec so sorry for some bits I missed. Will get on it tonight when I am home 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 Jochen at herr-schmitt.de Thu Jan 19 16:31:49 2006 From: Jochen at herr-schmitt.de (Jochen Schmitt) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:31:49 +0100 Subject: buildsys refused Message-ID: <20060119163149.GA5730@myhome> Hello, I try to build blender, but I have got a 111, 'Connection refused', when I tryped 'make plague'. It will be nice, if anyone can fix it. Best Regargs: Jochen Schmitt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 19 16:48:52 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:48:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060119164852.2EBC380E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 SIBsim4-0.9-1.fc4 dejavu-fonts-2.2-3.fc4 gdesklets-0.35.3-1.1.fc4 mock-0.4-3.fc4 perl-Params-Util-0.10-1.fc4 rtorrent-0.4.2-3.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 Thu Jan 19 16:48:44 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:48:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060119164844.9A1E180E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 dejavu-fonts-2.2-3.fc3 mock-0.4-3.fc3 perl-Params-Util-0.10-1.fc3 rtorrent-0.4.2-3.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 Thu Jan 19 16:49:01 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:49:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060119164901.16ED380E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 9 SIBsim4-0.9-1.fc5 hddtemp-0.3-0.7.beta14.fc5 lzop-1.01-4.fc5 mock-0.4-3.fc5 perl-IO-Tty-1.02-4.fc5 perl-IPC-Run-0.79-3.fc5 perl-MailTools-1.72-1.fc5 perl-Params-Util-0.10-1.fc5 perl-Params-Validate-0.79-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From steve at silug.org Thu Jan 19 16:56:05 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:56:05 -0600 Subject: rpms/perl-HTML-Mason/devel .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 perl-HTML-Mason.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <1137648553.5272.367.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <200601110101.k0B111V5007072@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1137648553.5272.367.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060119165605.GA15693@osiris.silug.org> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:29:12AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > --- perl-HTML-Mason.spec 16 Sep 2005 20:17:49 -0000 1.2 > > +++ perl-HTML-Mason.spec 11 Jan 2006 01:00:28 -0000 1.3 > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > Name: perl-HTML-Mason > > -Version: 1.3101 > > -Release: 3%{?dist} > > +Version: 1.32 > > +Release: 1%{?dist} > > This change doesn't work. > > RPM-wise, version 1.3101 is greater than version 1.32, so people won't > ever see this update. Argh. I didn't think of that. Do I have any choice other than an Epoch bump? 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 Thu Jan 19 16:55:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:55:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191655.k0JGt7ox004878@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-19 11:55 EST ------- Already submitted (bug 175980), please close one of these as a dupe. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:05:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:05:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191705.k0JH5HYd006735@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-19 12:05 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Also fedora extra's guidelines say md5sum of the source package should match the > one from upstream, but upstream i can't seem to find the _nocrypto source, could > you please provide a link to it? > > If its custom patched, the normal way to do this is thru a patch, and including > the original upstream source and patching it on the fly, only exceptions to this > i've seen so far is when patents prevent RH from distributing the original source No, stuff like crypto, MP3 support, etc. must be removed from the tarball entirely. See bmp for an example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 19 17:11:17 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:11:17 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-HTML-Mason/devel .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 perl-HTML-Mason.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <20060119165605.GA15693@osiris.silug.org> References: <200601110101.k0B111V5007072@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1137648553.5272.367.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060119165605.GA15693@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <1137690678.5272.465.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 10:56 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:29:12AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > --- perl-HTML-Mason.spec 16 Sep 2005 20:17:49 -0000 1.2 > > > +++ perl-HTML-Mason.spec 11 Jan 2006 01:00:28 -0000 1.3 > > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > > Name: perl-HTML-Mason > > > -Version: 1.3101 > > > -Release: 3%{?dist} > > > +Version: 1.32 > > > +Release: 1%{?dist} > > > > This change doesn't work. > > > > RPM-wise, version 1.3101 is greater than version 1.32, so people won't > > ever see this update. > > Argh. I didn't think of that. > > Do I have any choice other than an Epoch bump? The only thing coming to my mind would be to use a version of 1.3200 instead of 1.32. But I am not sure if incrementing the Epoch would be "cleaner", in this case :( Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 17:09:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:09:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191709.k0JH9QbX007417@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 12:09 EST ------- I've made all your suggested changes, and more: Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-8.src.rpm Regarding the source ball... I wanted to remove export controlled crypto code from the azureus distributions. We're trying to make it use existing crypto package (GNU Crypto and Jessie, for instance). If testing tells us that we absolutely need bouncycastle, then that should be a separate package. I put a comment in the spec file explaining what directory I deleted from the source distribution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:11:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:11:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191711.k0JHBbmh007931@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 12:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > I've made all your suggested changes, and more: > > Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus.spec > SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-8.src.rpm Oops - that was supposed to read: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-10.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 Jan 19 17:15:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:15:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191715.k0JHFaqI008440@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 12:15 EST ------- Taking a look at it now. Reason for excluding crypto is definatly good enough (i mentioned that in my original comment, patent & export restrictions are solid reasons :-) I just noticed btw you forgot: Requires(post): desktop-file-utils Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils Which are required for 'update-desktop-database'. With the link you probably meant: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-10.src.rpm But i found it ok :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:19:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:19:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191719.k0JHJF81009055@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 12:19 EST ------- Ps the desktop file is supposed to be installed thru: desktop-file-install --vendor fedora \ --dir ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications \ --add-category X-Fedora \ %{SOURCE2} this adds the correct vendor and category tags More details on this here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#desktop Then you also need: BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:22:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:22:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191722.k0JHMg4b009709@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-19 12:22 EST ------- Okay, please download again and we'll start from there. Subsequent versions will get their revision updated. Probably still need to shuffle files around. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:29:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:29:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191729.k0JHTAFp010670@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 12:29 EST ------- Formal review list so far: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included doesn't match upsteam source, but for a good reason :-) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - Proper directory-ownerships - **ERROR: No complete desktop file & install handling yet Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock build cleanly Almost 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 Thu Jan 19 17:34:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:34:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191734.k0JHYpoE011787@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 12:34 EST ------- rpmlint's only warning is about libswt3-gtk, but since so auto-depedencies don't pick this up rpmlint is wrong in this case. Small side note: Why is it that it leaves 'plugins' dirs in any directory you start this up in? Shouldn't it use ~/.Azureus/plugins/ for that? (which also exists) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From justin.conover at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 17:39:39 2006 From: justin.conover at gmail.com (Justin Conover) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:39:39 -0600 Subject: mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1137687793.4210.11.camel@sen.castleinthesky.org> References: <1137687793.4210.11.camel@sen.castleinthesky.org> Message-ID: On 1/19/06, Matthew Hall wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 08:31 -0600, Justin Conover wrote: > > http://www.nrpms.net/Packages/fedora-4-i386/mono/ > > > > Has Matthew Hall looked into pushing some of his mono src.rpms/specs > > to extras to include some of the work and apps he has already created? > > Just thought it might be eaiser to push things like monodevelop, > > banshee, blam and whatever else into extras/core without starting from > > scratch on the spec files? > > Yes, I have thought about this. I'm going to retire nrpms.net when FC5 > is released and move to submitting the packages nrpms provides to extras > and core. > > I started a thread around this on the nrpms mailing list last week ( > http://archives.nrpms.net/index.cgi?mss:425:200601:nfeipcmfkfjpmilfimlc) > > Cheers, > Matt > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQBDz7zwnGlGBpoqkysRAk0NAJ0dkBNftaWjvpoA+fIUpuHJMflzGACgnnRl > zKxVbGmXRJCy6MatJLFBjYU= > =lsAr > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I agree, duplicating efforts now would be a waste of your time, you do some great packaging for fedora already, might as well jump on one ship. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 17:44:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:44:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191744.k0JHipjb013472@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 12:44 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > rpmlint's only warning is about libswt3-gtk, but since so auto-depedencies don't > pick this up rpmlint is wrong in this case. Ok, try.. http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-11.src.rpm I think it has eveything you've suggested. > Small side note: Why is it that it leaves 'plugins' dirs in any directory you > start this up in? Shouldn't it use ~/.Azureus/plugins/ for that? (which also exists) I'm not sure, but I have an idea. That would be a good issue to file in bugzilla once this is accepted. :-) Thanks for all your help! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:46:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:46:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191746.k0JHko0S013872@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-19 12:46 EST ------- > I don't think that we need an explicit requirement on filesystem. ok, makes sense. Just wanted to make sure we checked that. >I talked with the author on IRC ("Company" - usually can be found in #gstreamer >on chat.freenode.net). He said that he'd have to get access to the box in >question or at least get some more information to diagnose the segfault. Is >there anyone else out there that could give this package a try? I am "nirik99" on freenode.net. I will try and look him up later today when I have time and get him access to my test box (if he wants it). Hopefully some other folks can test the package for functionality as well... :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:48:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:48:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191748.k0JHmd1Z014175@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-19 12:48 EST ------- According to the packaging guidelines, dos2unix shouldn't be used to convert line endings. The following should be used instead: %{__sed} -i 's/\r//' filename -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 17:59:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:59:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191759.k0JHxd8T016629@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 12:59 EST ------- Woops Jeffrey is right, it reads: E: foo-package wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /path/to/somefile: This error occurs because of DOS line breaks in a file. Fix it with sed in the %prep section: %{__sed} -i 's/\r//' src/somefile -- DONT use dos2unix, that can cause build fail on FC3. Didn't know about the FC3 problem, could you please put that last fix in the 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 Thu Jan 19 18:00:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:00:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191800.k0JI0uiP016814@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 13:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > Then you also need: > BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils I'm still missing that part :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 19 18:04:52 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:04:52 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-HTML-Mason/devel .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 perl-HTML-Mason.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <20060119165605.GA15693@osiris.silug.org> References: <200601110101.k0B111V5007072@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1137648553.5272.367.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060119165605.GA15693@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <1137693892.10786.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le jeudi 19 janvier 2006 ? 10:56 -0600, Steven Pritchard a ?crit : > On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:29:12AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > --- perl-HTML-Mason.spec 16 Sep 2005 20:17:49 -0000 1.2 > > > +++ perl-HTML-Mason.spec 11 Jan 2006 01:00:28 -0000 1.3 > > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > > Name: perl-HTML-Mason > > > -Version: 1.3101 > > > -Release: 3%{?dist} > > > +Version: 1.32 > > > +Release: 1%{?dist} > > > > This change doesn't work. > > > > RPM-wise, version 1.3101 is greater than version 1.32, so people won't > > ever see this update. > > Argh. I didn't think of that. > > Do I have any choice other than an Epoch bump? I did an epoch bump for the same reason on another perl package two days ago. The solution would be to convince upstream to use a fixed-digit version number (padding with zeros if necessary) but the idea might not be well received. In fact in my case the response was such I almost orphaned the package at once. -- 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 steve at silug.org Thu Jan 19 18:18:59 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:18:59 -0600 Subject: weird build problem Message-ID: <20060119181859.GA16863@osiris.silug.org> I've been trying off and on for a couple of weeks now to get celestia to build on rawhide. The build fails with this: [...] checking for deflate in -lz... no configure: error: zlib not found. But zlib-devel is installed... ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= [...] zlib-devel x86_64 1.2.3-1.1 core 100 k I'm confused. 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 Thu Jan 19 18:17:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:17:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191817.k0JIHaHE019488@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 13:17 EST ------- (In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #9) > > Then you also need: > > BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils > > I'm still missing that part :-) > Ok, fixed. And I'm using sed instead of dos2unix. http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus.spec http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/azureus-2.3.0.6-12.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 ivazquez at ivazquez.net Thu Jan 19 18:37:03 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:37:03 -0500 Subject: RFC: Mass rebuild of Fedora Extras before FC5 and how to handle orphaned packges for FC5 In-Reply-To: <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137351560.3473.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137352319.9831.74.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137353590.3473.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137355321.26382.5.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910601151227g7a804ac0x388c2572f66c481a@mail.gmail.com> <1137363201.26382.16.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1137429466.2801.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137430832.17219.240.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1137431872.2801.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137695823.3410.20.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Montag, den 16.01.2006, 18:00 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:37 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Sonntag, den 15.01.2006, 16:13 -0600 schrieb Josh Boyer: > > > > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > > > On 1/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > > > 1) Create a FE5 blocker bug. > > > > > Another idea: Tell everybody to rebuild. Wait a week. Fill bugs for all > > > packages that dind't get rebuild. > > > > This only works if packages build-deps are independent of each other. In > > reality, a package depends on a tree of packages. > > > > Therefore you have to sequentially rebuilt from the root of the tree of > > package deps and can't "Tell everybody to rebuild" (== rebuild > > everything at once). > - we have a script that builds everything in the correct order We could use repoquery to write this. Give me a bit of time to put it together. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 18:54:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:54:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166796] Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191854.k0JIsGGH025543@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166796 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tibbs at math.uh.edu ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-01-19 13:54 EST ------- I have a need for cmucl packages, so I figured I'd put in some work into a review. rpmlint output: W: cmucl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/cmucl/internals.h E: cmucl no-signature E: cmucl-extras requires-on-release cmucl 19c-2 W: cmucl-extras no-documentation E: cmucl-extras no-signature Issues: - The single header file that's included in the main package. I can't imagine it's worth creating a separate -devel package for one file, but that would have to be decided by someone more knowledgeable than I. Is it needed for the compiler to operate? - The license. Upstream does not include a separate license text. The specfile indicates "Public Domain", but the README file says "... is mostly in the public domain". Section 1.3 of the manual lists a number of copyright statements; I will include them at the end of this review. An expert will need to make sure these are acceptable, and then decide whether it's reasonable to call the whole "Public Domain". - rpmlint complains "E: cmucl-extras requires-on-release cmucl 19c-2". Unfortunately I don't know what this means. (rpmlint -i provides no explanation.) - rpmlint complains "W: cmucl-extras no-documentation", and indeed there is no documentation included in the package. I think it would be reasonable to explain just what some of this stuff is. At minimum, the %description for the extras package could list what is included. - The spec includes two separate build methods. Are they both needed? - ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} - Is there no portability at all to x86_64 or PPC? - Since the compiler builds itself, the srpm includes a pre-built copy. I believe this is accepted practice but I figured I'd make sure. Here are the copyright statements from the manual: CMUCL's CLOS implementation is derived from the PCL reference implementation written at Xerox PARC: Copyright (c) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 Xerox Corporation. All rights reserved. Use and copying of this software and preparation of derivative works based upon this software are permitted. Any distribution of this software or derivative works must comply with all applicable United States export control laws. This software is made available AS IS, and Xerox Corporation makes no warranty about the software, its performance or its conformity to any specification. Its implementation of the LOOP macro was derived from code from Symbolics, which was derived from code written at MIT: Portions of LOOP are Copyright (c) 1986 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All Rights Reserved. Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided that the M.I.T. copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation. The names "M.I.T." and "Massachusetts Institute of Technology" may not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the software without specific, written prior permission. Notice must be given in supporting documentation that copying distribution is by permission of M.I.T. M.I.T. makes no representations about the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty. Portions of LOOP are Copyright (c) 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992 by Symbolics, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided that the Symbolics copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation. The name "Symbolics" may not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the software without specific, written prior permission. Notice must be given in supporting documentation that copying distribution is by permission of Symbolics. Symbolics makes no representations about the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty. Symbolics, CLOE Runtime, and Minima are trademarks, and CLOE, Genera, and Zetalisp are registered trademarks of Symbolics, Inc. The CLX code is copyrighted by Texas Instruments Incorporated: Copyright (C) 1987 Texas Instruments Incorporated. Permission is granted to any individual or institution to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software, provided that this complete copyright and permission notice is maintained, intact, in all copies and supporting documentation. Texas Instruments Incorporated provides this software "as is" without express or implied warranty. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 19:02:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:02:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166796] Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191902.k0JJ2PD6026628@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166796 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-19 14:02 EST ------- Thanks. > W: cmucl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/cmucl/internals.h Since cmucl *is* a compiler afterall, I think it's ok to include it here. (-: > - The license. Looks like a mix of PD and MIT. I'll fix that. > - The spec includes two separate build methods. Are they both needed? method 1: use included/internal cmucl for bootstrap method 2: use (previous) rpm-built cmucl for bootstrap. Obviously, at least the first iteration for inclusion in Extras will have to be method 1. > - rpmlint complains "W: cmucl-extras no-documentation" I'll see if I can find some. (-: > - ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} - Is there no portability at all to x86_64 or PPC? Yes, no. It can theoretically work, but there's no bootstrap binary available from upstream, nor do I have any x86_64 or ppc box of my own to attempt to make 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 Thu Jan 19 19:02:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:02:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191902.k0JJ2XAB026681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-19 14:02 EST ------- Why is junit in Requires:? In my book that's a unit test program and not used in any application by end-users. However junit may have gained new powers that I'm not aware of... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imipak at yahoo.com Thu Jan 19 19:22:33 2006 From: imipak at yahoo.com (Jonathan Day) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:22:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in Message-ID: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi, This may be a newbie question, but is probably a little on the unusual side. It certainly isn't covered in the online documentation as far as I could see. Ok, the problem is this. There are probably about 50 software projects I actively track and use, which don't currently exist in RPM form, most of which are GPL or BSD (the rest all have OSI-approved licences) and none of them contain any proprietary, closed or patented technology. It covers a wide range, from scientific software to networking software to programming languages to real-time support to software instrumentation/evaluation to games to graphics libraries. I wouldn't have the time (or disk space) to package everything, but then I seriously doubt extras would want everything - or probably even the bulk of these packages. My quesrtion is therefore simple: What sort of rules of thumb have been learned, over time, on what sort of software project makes for a good, solid first submission? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Thu Jan 19 19:25:03 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:25:03 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Build Error (Job 2393): alltray-0_65-1_fc5 on fedora-development-extras] Message-ID: <1137698703.3410.26.camel@ignacio.lan> -------- Forwarded Message -------- > From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org > To: ivazquez at ivazquez.net > Subject: Build Error (Job 2393): alltray-0_65-1_fc5 on > fedora-development-extras > Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:34:58 -0500 (EST) > > Job failed on arch x86_64 > Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2393-alltray-0.65-1.fc5/ > checking for working function preloading (LD_PRELOAD)... no > configure: error: Will abort now. > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.17237 (%build) Here's what config.log has to say: configure:21435: gcc -shared -o ./ld_preload_lib1.so ./ld_preload_lib1.c /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccSZm6GY.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /tmp/ccSZm6GY.o: could not read symbols: Bad value collect2: ld returned 1 exit status configure:21438: $? = 1 configure:21466: result: no I asked the upstream devel and he has no clue. How do I go about solving this? From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 19:21:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:21:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191921.k0JJLJWH031539@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 chabotc at xs4all.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl 2006-01-19 14:21 EST ------- New reviewlist based on release 12: MUST review items: - Builds cleanly on FC5 devel. - Source included doesn't match upsteam source, but for a good reason :-) - Package name meets guidelines - spec file name is in %{name}.spec format - Licence is fedora extra's compatible & is included - Spec file is in (american) english - Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines - All build dependencies are listed - No ldconfig needed - All files have proper permissions - Package is not relocatable - No duplicate files in %files section - No missing files in %files section - Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines - No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation - No -devel package needed - Proper directory-ownerships - Correct desktop file & install handling & categories Should items: - Includes upstream licence(s) file - No insane scriplets - No unnescesarry requires - Mock build cleanly (fedora-devel-i386) I've even tried to compile w/o junit, but can tell you that Azureus does depend on it (azureus-2.3.0.6/org/gudy/azureus2/ui/console/multiuser/TestUserManager.java), the how and what and why i will leave to AG, i'm not skilled in java enough to comment on this, but this isn't a packaging issue, more something for future bugzilla reports (i'm sure quite a few of those will follow, but better to do that in bugzilla/cvs). So: FE-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 caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 19:25:43 2006 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:25:43 -0500 Subject: Nvu? In-Reply-To: References: <43CEB0C7.9080708@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43CFE7B7.5050604@redhat.com> On 01/18/2006 04:44 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: > > RS> Havent seen any discussions happening. Go for it. > > A great idea in theory, but in practice I think I'm a bit out of my > league. I know there were specfiles floating about, but none seem to > be for Nvu 1.0. The tantalizing bit from the archives: > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-March/msg00097.html > > from Christopher Aillon (who I understand is Red Hat's Mozilla man) > stating that he was working on a package kind of put an end to the > discussion. I abandoned the nvu package after realizing it differed too far from the Firefox 1.0 branch. I'd want to add equivalents of all the patches our Firefox 1.0.x RPMs have into nvu, but the porting of the patches was too much work at the time. > I hope he doesn't mind a CC. I'm subscribed to this list. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 19:22:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:22:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 166796] Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191922.k0JJMcum031890@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166796 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-01-19 14:22 EST ------- > Since cmucl *is* a compiler afterall, I think it's ok to include it here. (-: I would tend to agree; I wonder why rpmlint doesn't complain about gcc which does the same thing. Ahhh, it has a specific exception. > method 1: use included/internal cmucl for bootstrap > method 2: use (previous) rpm-built cmucl for bootstrap. > > Obviously, at least the first iteration for inclusion in Extras will have to > be method 1. I see. Do you plan to switch it over once the package is included? > > - ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} - Is there no portability at all to x86_64 or PPC? > > Yes, no. It can theoretically work, but there's no bootstrap binary available > from upstream, nor do I have any x86_64 or ppc box of my own to attempt to > make one. I can give you an account on an x86_64 machine if you like, but I can't help you with PPC. I think the requires-on-release is fixed by replacing the Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} lines by Requires: %{name} = %{version} -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 19:24:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:24:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191924.k0JJO2RC032512@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-19 14:23 EST ------- Thanks! BTW, I've removed the junit dependency by removing the one bit of test code that didn't really belong in the runtime. So I'll be checking in a version -13 later today. Thanks again! AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 19 19:33:31 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:33:31 -0500 Subject: weird build problem In-Reply-To: <20060119181859.GA16863@osiris.silug.org> References: <20060119181859.GA16863@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <1137699211.3410.28.camel@ignacio.lan> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 12:18 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote: > I've been trying off and on for a couple of weeks now to get celestia > to build on rawhide. The build fails with this: > > [...] > checking for deflate in -lz... no > configure: error: zlib not found. > > But zlib-devel is installed... > > ============================================================================= > Package Arch Version Repository Size > ============================================================================= > [...] > zlib-devel x86_64 1.2.3-1.1 core 100 k > > I'm confused. configure:27181: checking for deflate in -lz configure:27211: gcc -o conftest -ansi -W -Wall -Wchar-subscripts -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wmissing-prototypes -Wwrite-strings -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_BSD_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -O2 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=nocona -Wformat-security -Wmissing-format-attribute -O2 -Wall -ffast-math -fexpensive-optimizations -fomit-frame-pointer conftest.c -lz -lSM -lICE -lm -lXmu -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm -lz >&5 /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lXmu collect2: ld returned 1 exit status configure:27217: $? = 1 -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 19:36:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:36:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601191936.k0JJa7Wu002744@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-19 14:35 EST ------- I managed to get a monitor/mouse attached to my test box and do some testing. It works just fine on a local X session. The segfault must be due to vnc doing something odd. I don't see any further blockers, so this package is APPROVED. As soon as the bugzilla component is created we should add a bug on the vnc issue so it's tracked and solved. Thanks for the nifty package. Don't forget to close this bug once the package is imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 19 19:40:44 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:40:44 -0500 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 11:22 -0800, Jonathan Day wrote: > My quesrtion is therefore simple: What sort of rules > of thumb have been learned, over time, on what sort of > software project makes for a good, solid first submission? None. People review what they're interested in for the most part. This might be a good place to start though: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 20:02:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:02:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] New: Review Request: adplug-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=178360 Summary: Review Request: adplug-xmms Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: triad at df.lth.se QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplug-xmms.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplug-xmms-1.1-1.src.rpm Description: AdPlug-XMMS is a XMMS plug-in for for AdLib (OPL2) music utilizing the AdPlug library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dcbw at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 20:10:09 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:10:09 -0500 Subject: weird build problem In-Reply-To: <1137699211.3410.28.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <20060119181859.GA16863@osiris.silug.org> <1137699211.3410.28.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1137701409.7738.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 14:33 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 12:18 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote: > > I've been trying off and on for a couple of weeks now to get celestia > > to build on rawhide. The build fails with this: > > > > [...] > > checking for deflate in -lz... no > > configure: error: zlib not found. > > > > But zlib-devel is installed... > > > > ============================================================================= > > Package Arch Version Repository Size > > ============================================================================= > > [...] > > zlib-devel x86_64 1.2.3-1.1 core 100 k > > > > I'm confused. > > configure:27181: checking for deflate in -lz > configure:27211: gcc -o conftest -ansi -W -Wall -Wchar-subscripts > -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wmissing-prototypes -Wwrite-strings > -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_BSD_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -O2 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall > -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector > --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=nocona -Wformat-security > -Wmissing-format-attribute -O2 -Wall -ffast-math > -fexpensive-optimizations -fomit-frame-pointer conftest.c -lz -lSM > -lICE -lm -lXmu -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm -lz > >&5 > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lXmu > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > configure:27217: $? = 1 Steven, So it appears you need libXmu installed. Why, I don't know. But it's not installed due to modular X in rawhide, since now every X library is a different RPM. [localhost ~]# rpm -q --whatprovides /usr/lib/libXmu.so.6.2.0 libXmu-1.0.0-1 Dan From dcbw at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 20:13:06 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:13:06 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Build Error (Job 2393): alltray-0_65-1_fc5 on fedora-development-extras] In-Reply-To: <1137698703.3410.26.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1137698703.3410.26.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1137701586.8047.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 14:25 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org > > To: ivazquez at ivazquez.net > > Subject: Build Error (Job 2393): alltray-0_65-1_fc5 on > > fedora-development-extras > > Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:34:58 -0500 (EST) > > > > Job failed on arch x86_64 > > > Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/2393-alltray-0.65-1.fc5/ > > > checking for working function preloading (LD_PRELOAD)... no > > > configure: error: Will abort now. > > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.17237 (%build) > > Here's what config.log has to say: > > configure:21435: gcc -shared > -o ./ld_preload_lib1.so ./ld_preload_lib1.c /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccSZm6GY.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC > /tmp/ccSZm6GY.o: could not read symbols: Bad value > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > configure:21438: $? = 1 > configure:21466: result: no > > I asked the upstream devel and he has no clue. How do I go about solving > this? Um, add -fPIC to CFLAGS before calling configure unless it is already and configure is just ignoring it? Dan From jamatos at fc.up.pt Thu Jan 19 18:36:43 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:36:43 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43CEA82A.6050102@ieee.org> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601181104.06656.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43CEA82A.6050102@ieee.org> Message-ID: <200601191836.43586.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:42, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > > > FWIW and being consistent with other recent changes the best move would > > have been for fftw to have become fftw2 as soon as version 3 was declare > > stable. > > I agree, but I introduced fftw3 because there was no interest on the > part of the maintainer of fftw of moving to the 3.x releases. FWIW, > Debian has a fftw3 package. I would like exceptions like this to be the exception and not the rule. ;-) > > All the development for this library is happening in version 3, where > >release 3.1 is entering beta phase. > > > > So let us request the change, for you it should be enough to Obsolete > > fftw3, no? > > > > Then we need to change accordingly the packages that require fftw to > > require fftw2 and those requiring fftw3 to fftw. Since packages should > > only build require the -devel version if we synchronize our releases all > > will still work. > > > >Does this sounds like a plan? > > This seems reasonble. Currently, fftw3 is only in the FC-4 and devel > branches. This is because the main reason I wanted it in Extras was for > Octave, which was still in core for FC3. I don't see any particular need > to change everything in FC-4, so maybe we just make the changes in devel > so that they will be in place for FC-5? That seems fair, although I don't see any problem changing that to FC-4, since that is the first version that we really control. Actually I like this more but I am not dogmatic about it. :-) So the question remains, FC-4 or FC-5? The advantage of FC-4 is that it would allow us to carry the same spec file, while FC-5 is not yet released. > If we were to make this change, here are the packages that require fftw: > fftw-devel > grace > > (It also appears glame on livna would be affected.) This will only affect new buildings, previous packages will work fine. We could contact as well other repositories about this change. It would be nice. :-) > Here are the packages that currently require fftw3: > fftw3-devel > octave > octave-forge > osiv > plplot-octave > > I maintain octave and octave-forge, and having looked at the others, it > appears the plplot dependency is implicit, so the only other package > needing an update is osiv. So it should be easy. :-) > -Quentin -- Jos? Ab?lio From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 20:37:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:37:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177782] Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192037.k0JKbaoU014711@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: byzanz - A desktop recorder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177782 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-19 15:37 EST ------- Package imported and built on -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 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Thu Jan 19 21:37:11 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:37:11 +0100 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> Le jeudi 19 janvier 2006 ? 14:40 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams a ?crit : > On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 11:22 -0800, Jonathan Day wrote: > > My quesrtion is therefore simple: What sort of rules > > of thumb have been learned, over time, on what sort of > > software project makes for a good, solid first submission? > > None. People review what they're interested in for the most part. > > This might be a good place to start though: > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList > Who fill this page ? Because i see a software (G Media Server) in this wishlist which requires a package (libupnp) that i have submitted but it's still without reviewer. Thanks Eric From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 19 21:45:07 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:45:07 -0500 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <604aa7910601191345l52fba067o3e4423b83409fac6@mail.gmail.com> On 1/19/06, Eric Tanguy wrote: > Who fill this page ? Because i see a software (G Media Server) in this > wishlist which requires a package (libupnp) that i have submitted but > it's still without reviewer. You should be able to look back at the edit history of the page and find the wiki user who added that. -jef From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Thu Jan 19 21:56:46 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:56:46 +0100 Subject: buildsys refused In-Reply-To: <20060119163149.GA5730@myhome> References: <20060119163149.GA5730@myhome> Message-ID: <43D00B1E.1020709@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jochen Schmitt wrote: > Hello, > > I try to build blender, but I have got a 111, 'Connection refused', when I > tryped 'make plague'. > > It will be nice, if anyone can fix it. > > Best Regargs: > > Jochen Schmitt > Same here... - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD0AseQEQyPsWM8csRAiLIAKCPOb0LX8wNYsN1eK1B3f82iL88CQCgvCEc Fit+SH5QqdturWfflRBfrw8= =5r+8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bdpepple at ameritech.net Thu Jan 19 22:02:00 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:02:00 -0500 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <1137708120.13750.0.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.org> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 22:37 +0100, Eric Tanguy wrote: > Who fill this page ? Because i see a software (G Media Server) in this > wishlist which requires a package (libupnp) that i have submitted but > it's still without reviewer. > Why not look at the revision history for the page? /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 sundaram at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 22:10:11 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:40:11 +0530 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1137699644.3410.34.camel@ignacio.lan> <1137706631.3118.6.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <43D00E43.6050903@redhat.com> Eric Tanguy wrote: >Le jeudi 19 janvier 2006 ? 14:40 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams a ?crit : > > >>On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 11:22 -0800, Jonathan Day wrote: >> >> >>>My quesrtion is therefore simple: What sort of rules >>>of thumb have been learned, over time, on what sort of >>>software project makes for a good, solid first submission? >>> >>> >>None. People review what they're interested in for the most part. >> >>This might be a good place to start though: >> >>http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList >> >> >> >Who fill this page ? Because i see a software (G Media Server) in this >wishlist which requires a package (libupnp) that i have submitted but >it's still without reviewer. >Thanks >Eric > > I did. I remember someone requesting in one of the user channels. No personal interest in it. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 22:13:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:13:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175980] Review Request: w3c-libwww In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192213.k0JMDrWt030722@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175980 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-19 17:13 EST ------- w3c-libwww has also been submitted as bug 178310. The other submitted w3c-libwww seems to me to be in better shape, as it has some important patches allready, it uses macros better and the separation of apps in a subpackage seems right to me. In fact the other seems to be derived from the fedora core package while this one isn't. However, this one was the first to be submitted so it should be the one considered. Maybe you could get in touch with the submitter of the other bug or restart from the spec file in the other bug, or get the good ideas from the other submission? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 19 22:33:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:33:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192233.k0JMXoWM000785@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-19 17:33 EST ------- The upstream maintainers have vanished into the ether... see the licensing discussion here: http://www.monkey.org/openbsd/archive/ports/0010/msg00009.html I tend to go with what Debian decided, which is public domain. - Added the Japanese manpage. - The cursor change seems temporary, as X seems to eventually put the cursor back to normal... someone who understands X's internals better than me is welcome to try and fix oneko. - The removed "BSD Daemon" was a set of graphics for oneko that turned it from a cat into the BSD logo, has nothing to do with its non existent shutdown. - Doc files renamed with ".jp" extension where appropriate. - Used %{_includedir} - Removed _i386_ define (as it will not be always true) - fix typo - remove redundant BR - add -p to install New package here: SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/oneko-1.2-2.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/oneko.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 Thu Jan 19 22:45:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:45:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192245.k0JMjRaY002794@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-19 17:45 EST ------- Good: - rpmlint checks return: E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libupnp.so.1.2.1 libupnp.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libthreadutil.so libthreadutil.so E: libupnp invalid-soname /usr/lib/libixml.so libixml.so W: libupnp devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libupnp.so The invalid soname issue is a symptom of bad code, but this isn't fatal. Safe to ignore all rpmlint errors and the warning. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (BSD) 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 - no locales - not relocatable - creates no directories - 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 - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base package n-v-r 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi Thu Jan 19 22:49:59 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:49:59 +0200 Subject: rpms/alltray/devel alltray.spec,1.2,1.3 In-Reply-To: <200601192224.k0JMObMC010883@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200601192224.k0JMObMC010883@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1137710999.886.33.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 17:24 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: [...] > Added -fPIC to RPM_OPT_FLAGS [...] > %build > +RPM_OPT_FLAGS="-fPIC $RPM_OPT_FLAGS" > %configure That's probably a no-op unless upstream ./configure handles $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. Try 'export CFLAGS="-fPIC $RPM_OPT_FLAGS"' or something like '%{expand: %%define optflags -fPIC %{optflags}}'. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 19 23:00:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:00:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192300.k0JN0BCN004583@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-19 18:00 EST ------- Good: - rpmlint checks return: E: ushare non-standard-uid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-gid /var/lib/ushare ushare E: ushare non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ushare 0770 Safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - license (GPL) 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 MAJOR BLOCKER: You should not use %{_datadir}/locale/* to grab the locale files. This causes you to own some of the locale directories. Instead, you should use the %find_lang macro like this: (at the end of %install): %find_lang %{name} Then, instead of %files, put: %files -f %{name}.lang Remove %{_datadir}/locale/*, the %{name}.lang will cover it. MINOR BLOCKER: Please uncomment the %doc line. It's valid. :) Show me a package with those blockers resolved, and I'll 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 Thu Jan 19 23:16:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:16:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173549] Review Request: xfce4-mount-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192316.k0JNGst6006681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mount-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173549 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-19 18:16 EST ------- Here is a detailed review: + mock succesfully built the srpms + rpmlint did not complain about errors + package conforms to the package guideline (spec name, version, ...) + versionning of the package follows Fedora Extras standards + tarball from upstream match with the tarball from source rpm. + package is under GPL license thus following legal section of PackagingGuidelines + no error encountered after installing and removing package Following this review, this package is ready to be in Fedora Extras thus changing the status to 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 Thu Jan 19 23:19:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:19:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173549] Review Request: xfce4-mount-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601192319.k0JNJTsa007067@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mount-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173549 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-19 18:19 EST ------- Forgot to add on this quote: + tarball from upstream match with the tarball from source rpm. I used both md5sum and sha1sum -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From steve at silug.org Thu Jan 19 23:39:13 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:39:13 -0600 Subject: weird build problem In-Reply-To: <1137701409.7738.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060119181859.GA16863@osiris.silug.org> <1137699211.3410.28.camel@ignacio.lan> <1137701409.7738.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060119233913.GA27863@osiris.silug.org> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:10:09PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > So it appears you need libXmu installed. Why, I don't know. But it's > not installed due to modular X in rawhide, since now every X library is > a different RPM. I thought I had tracked down all the modular X requirements. *sigh* Thanks (to both of you). 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 orion at cora.nwra.com Thu Jan 19 23:47:47 2006 From: orion at cora.nwra.com (Orion Poplawski) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:47:47 -0700 Subject: gridengine Message-ID: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> I'm thinking about packaging up Sun's Grid Engine. Two issues though: - License: SISSL - Is this okay? OpenOffice used to be SISSL, right? - Install location: SGE pretty much insists on being installed under a single directory. Might be able to tweak it a little, but not much. This obviously does not conform to the filesystem standard. Is this okay? If so, where should the bulk of the stuff go? /usr/gridengine? -- 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 redhat.com Fri Jan 20 00:00:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173552] Review Request: xfce4-sensors-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200000.k0K00msS011779@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sensors-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173552 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-19 19:00 EST ------- Detailed review: + mock succesfully built the source package. No errors reported + rpmlint did not complain. No warning nor errors reported + package follow the PackageNameGuideline procedure: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + tarball from source rpm matched source url listed on spec file. Both matched by md5sum and sha1sum + No error reported after install and removed package + License listed on SPEC file matches the source tarball : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Legal + SPEC file conform to PackagingGuideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines Accordingly, this package is ready to be submitted on Fedora Extras so the status is set to 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 rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Jan 20 02:33:13 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:33:13 +0100 Subject: buildsys refused In-Reply-To: <43D00B1E.1020709@lowlatency.de> References: <20060119163149.GA5730@myhome> <43D00B1E.1020709@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <1137724393.5272.474.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 22:56 +0100, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jochen Schmitt wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I try to build blender, but I have got a 111, 'Connection refused', when I > > tryped 'make plague'. > > > > It will be nice, if anyone can fix it. > > > > Best Regargs: > > > > Jochen Schmitt > > > > Same here... Any update on this? The issue seems to persist. Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' Ralf From dcbw at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 02:38:10 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:38:10 -0500 Subject: buildsys refused In-Reply-To: <1137724393.5272.474.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060119163149.GA5730@myhome> <43D00B1E.1020709@lowlatency.de> <1137724393.5272.474.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1137724691.9784.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 03:33 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 22:56 +0100, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Jochen Schmitt wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I try to build blender, but I have got a 111, 'Connection refused', when I > > > tryped 'make plague'. > > > > > > It will be nice, if anyone can fix it. > > > > > > Best Regargs: > > > > > > Jochen Schmitt > > > > > > > Same here... > Any update on this? The issue seems to persist. > > Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' Appears to be a certificate issue, which I'm tracking down. Sorry for the 6 hour lag, had to go out for 2 hours. Dan From admin at ramshacklestudios.com Fri Jan 20 03:20:57 2006 From: admin at ramshacklestudios.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:20:57 -0800 Subject: gridengine In-Reply-To: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> References: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> Message-ID: <1137727257.3561.10.camel@tuxhugger> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 16:47 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > - License: SISSL - Is this okay? Well, the SISSL is a license approved by the OSI (Open Source Initiative), so I think it should be okay. > OpenOffice used to be SISSL, right? Well, it used to be dual licensed under the SISSL and LGPL, but now is all LGPL'd. > - Install location: SGE pretty much insists on being installed under a > single directory. Might be able to tweak it a little, but not much. > This obviously does not conform to the filesystem standard. Is this > okay? If so, where should the bulk of the stuff go? /usr/gridengine? I would probably it under /usr/lib/gridengine or similar. Other "single directory" apps like being there too (such as OO.org and Mozilla's stuff). -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7 -------------- 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 Jan 20 04:39:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:39:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200439.k0K4dfNv016956@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-19 23:39 EST ------- Some more information. The current EPSG license info can be found at http://www.epsg.org/CurrentDB.html and contains the following additional note to clarify the use of the data in commercial / for profit applications: "With regard to (3) above, the data may be included within proprietary applications distributed on a commercial basis when the commerciality is based on application functionality and not on a value ascribed to the freely-distributed EPSG dataset." Note that the EPSG also acknowledges that this data forms part of the GeoTIFF specification on this page http://www.epsg.org/main.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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 06:13:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:13:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200613.k0K6DZir026707@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters at mac.com 2006-01-20 01:13 EST ------- updated svn co http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite-2.0.0-0.15.20060119svn119.fc5.src.rpm http://mpeters.us/silgraphite/silgraphite.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 Fri Jan 20 06:38:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200638.k0K6c77X029705@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-20 01:37 EST ------- I'm comfortable with the license as PD given this licensing discussion. Only one comment: The japanese man page does not need the '.jp' extension since it already lives in a 'ja' subdirectory. Everything else looks good as per comment #2. Fix the japanese manpage name and I'll 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 Fri Jan 20 06:54:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:54:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200654.k0K6sTjV031590@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 paul at xtdnet.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |paul at xtdnet.nl ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-20 01:54 EST ------- when updating from your first to your last rpm, I noticed amavisd is restarted twice: [root at cdc ~]# rpm -Uhv /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/noarch/amavisd-new-2.3.3-4.noarch.rpm Preparing... ########################################### [100%] 1:amavisd-new warning: /etc/amavisd/amavisd.conf created as /etc/amavisd/amavisd.conf.rpmnew ########################################### [100%] Shutting down amavisd: Can't SIGTERM amavisd[1337]: No such process at /usr/sbin/amavisd line 8983., can't stop the process [FAILED] Starting amavisd: Pid_file "/var/run/amavisd/amavisd.pid" already exists. Overwriting! [ OK ] Stopping clamd.amavisd: [ OK ] Starting clamd.amavisd: [ OK ] [root at cdc ~]# More importantly, amavisd never starts for me. It goes through a lot of good messages and then ends with an error: Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Found decoder for .zoo at /usr/bin/zoo Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Found decoder for .lha at /usr/bin/lha Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Found decoder for .cab at /usr/bin/cabextract Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: No decoder for .tnef tried: tnef Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Internal decoder for .tnef Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Found decoder for .exe at /usr/bin/unrar; /usr/bin/lha; /usr/bin/unarj Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Using internal av scanner code for (primary) ClamAV-clamd Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: Found secondary av scanner ClamAV-clamscan at /usr/bin/clamscan Jan 20 01:54:19 cdc amavis[1588]: TROUBLE in pre_loop_hook: db_init: BDB bad db env. at /var/spool/amavisd/db: Invalid argument, . at (eval 37) line 244. [root at cdc amavisd]# ls -al /var/spool/amavisd/db/ total 8 drwx------ 2 amavis amavis 4096 Jan 20 01:48 . drwx------ 5 amavis amavis 4096 Jan 20 01:49 .. This is a FC4-updated machine. [root at cdc amavisd]# rpm -V amavisd-new [root at cdc amavisd]# rpm -q amavisd-new amavisd-new-2.3.3-4 -- 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 jamatos at fc.up.pt Fri Jan 20 07:22:01 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:22:01 +0000 Subject: Newbie question on what extras would be interested in In-Reply-To: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060119192233.51052.qmail@web31502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200601200722.01696.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Thursday 19 January 2006 19:22, Jonathan Day wrote: > It covers a wide range, from > scientific software to networking software to > programming languages to real-time support to software > instrumentation/evaluation to games to graphics > libraries. Several of us here show a clear interest in scientific applications. I would say that those are welcome. :-) -- Jos? Ab?lio From triad at df.lth.se Fri Jan 20 08:29:15 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:29:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: gridengine In-Reply-To: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> References: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I'm thinking about packaging up Sun's Grid Engine. Two issues though: > - License: SISSL - Is this okay? OpenOffice used to be SISSL, right? Can you double check this with Sun? They have publicly announced that they have ditched SISSL in favor of industry standard GPL/LGPL. It could be that they just haven's had time to replace the license text. http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Sun_retires_the_Sun_Industry_Standards_Source_License Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 08:53:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:53:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176617] Review Request: libupnp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200853.k0K8r0T5014565@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-20 03:52 EST ------- Build fine on buildsys for devel FC3 and FC4 tree asked -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 20 08:53:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:53:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200853.k0K8rCY9014664@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 Bug 176618 depends on bug 176617, which changed state. Bug 176617 Summary: Review Request: libupnp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176617 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 Fri Jan 20 09:08:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:08:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200908.k0K9813O017770@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-20 04:07 EST ------- About package names... -tui is usually used for text uis and -gui for graphical uis. Perhaps you should do a separate subpackage for the text ui as smart-tui..? (If the text ui is something the user can live without. If I've understood correctly, it is.) I don't know which is better for the gui package: smart-gui, smart-gui-gtk or smart-gtk. I'd say choose the name which follows other similar package names. (I think smart-gui would follow better. At least there are system-config-*-gui packages out there but no system-config-*-gtk packages.) Actually I should have said "Where's gsmarttray?". Anyway, I've always liked the up2date system tray (because it lets me run the updates manually but still tells me when there are new updates) and I'd be happy if smart could have a similar applet. But, I'd like to see gnome/gtk style applet in addition to the kde/qt one because I won't be installing qt and kde libraries just because of one small applet for gnome... (Perhaps this discussion belongs to upstream though. If yes, please tell the message. :)) Anyways, I'd like to see smart/smartpm in extras-development soon. Don't hold it here at bugzilla for too long. Oh, about the package name (smart vs. smartpm)... If you feel strong about smartpm instead of smart, why not ask the upstream smart developers if they could change the tar name? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 20 09:13:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:13:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601200913.k0K9DUJ1018805@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-20 04:13 EST ------- Thanks New version : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/ushare.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/ushare-0.9.5-4.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 andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Fri Jan 20 09:32:34 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:32:34 +0100 Subject: wine-docs: buildsys messing up? Message-ID: <43D0AE32.3000208@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, maybe someone can give me a hand with this: wine-docs uses the same spec across all targets (fc3,fc4,devel) and builds fine on fc3 and devel. I at home use fc4 and it does build just fine (otherwise I would not have submitted this). However on the buildsystem it stops here: docbook2txt winedev-guide.sgml Using catalogs: /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-26.cat Using stylesheet: /usr/share/sgml/docbook/utils-0.6.14/docbook-utils.dsl#html Working on: /builddir/build/BUILD/wine-docs-0.9.6/en/winedev-guide.sgml ELinks: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [winedev-guide.txt] Error 9 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/wine-docs-0.9.6/en' make: *** [en] Error 2 So I started wondering why this is talking about ELinks? I cannot find any reference in the fc3 or devel build logs to this. So I figured to add elinks to the BR and give it another shot on fc4 but still fails with the same error. Here are the complete build logs (frist one w/o elinks) http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=3112 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=3116 Thanks Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD0K4yQEQyPsWM8csRAtfnAJ9FQZA46tiVQnQHBf/xVFpIF79iIACdHwvj jyNc7VQJVFQYBpC9J/HIXNY= =zPOJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 20 15:35:31 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:35:31 +0100 Subject: Anyone interested in maintaining alsa-{tools,firmware}, fuse{,-sshfs}, gwget, brightside or ghex? Message-ID: <1137771331.2856.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi Fedora Extras packagers. I'd like to get a bit more free time for other work regarding Fedora Extras and hope to get rid of some packages I maintain in FE. Is anybody interested in one of the following applications and would like to take over maintainership? alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-Supported soundcards alsa-tools - The ALSA Tools brightside - Add reactivity to the corners and edges of your GNOME desktop fuse - File System in Userspace fuse-sshfs - FUSE-Filesystem to access remote filesystems via SSH ghex - A binary editor for GNOME gwget - GUI Download manager using wget notemeister - Notemeister is a small, simple note organizer made for the GNOME2 desktop I don't use them anymore (ghex, gwget), never really did (alsa-*, fuse, notemeister) or started to hate them (brightside -- but I know I liked ?edge flipping? in gnome 1.x; seems I got older in between...). Simply send me a private mail if you are interested in one of those. tia And if no one is interested in them I'm going to live with the burden and will maintain nearly(*) all of them in the future, too -- but I think that a maintainer that really uses the packages he maintains would be the best solution for everyone. CU thl (*)notemeister is the exception -- upstream is dead (successor is newton.sf.net) and I think would be a good point to stop shipping it in FE -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- 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 Jan 20 15:35:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:35:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601201535.k0KFZgbO011384@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-01-20 10:35 EST ------- I haven't seen that error before. Had you been using the old rpm, or did you just have it installed? For that matter, do you know which old rpm you were 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 orion at cora.nwra.com Fri Jan 20 16:55:03 2006 From: orion at cora.nwra.com (Orion Poplawski) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:55:03 -0700 Subject: gridengine In-Reply-To: References: <43D02523.8020502@cora.nwra.com> Message-ID: <43D115E7.90003@cora.nwra.com> Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> I'm thinking about packaging up Sun's Grid Engine. Two issues though: >> - License: SISSL - Is this okay? OpenOffice used to be SISSL, right? > > > Can you double check this with Sun? They have publicly announced that > they have ditched SISSL in favor of industry standard GPL/LGPL. It could > be that they just haven's had time to replace the license text. > > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Sun_retires_the_Sun_Industry_Standards_Source_License > > > Linus > Sounds like projects live on with the current license until they formally move to a new one. SGE has not changed yet, but may soon. -- 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 dcbw at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 16:57:10 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:57:10 -0500 Subject: Extras buildsystem maintenance (again) Message-ID: <1137776231.26970.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, Buildsystem will be down for a while this afternoon (ie, around 1pm US EST) to tested fixes to the SSL hangs we've all cursed for the past week. Dan From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 20 17:24:33 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:24:33 +0100 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137528327.28950.138.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137435323.2801.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137528327.28950.138.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1137777873.7245.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 17.01.2006, 22:05 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 19:15 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Should we have add a %{?kmod_per_package_add-on} into the output that > > get_rpmtemplate creates? > > Urk, yes, I've considered stuff like that too, but hated it enough to > not even suggest it ;) > > I hope and believe these things can be taken care of in the userspace > $foo-common package, possibly using triggers if absolutely needed and if > nothing else works. Okay -- if we have to we can still revisit this decision if we have to... > > Take for example the nvidia-drivers of a well known 3rd party repo: they > > currently have a > > Conflicts: kernel-module-nvidia-legacy-%{kernel} > > in them -- that would not be possible with the new scheme and that > > sounds like a problem to me. > > Isn't it enough to make the userspace packages (ones providing > nvidia-glx-common and nvidia-glx-legacy-common) conflict with each > other? /me thinks a moment about it Yeah, *should* be... [...] > > > [URLs to sample packages] > > > > Creat, thanks! Looks quite good. > > Ok, next round: added RHEL4 compatibility (packaging-wise, not code). > Informational patches to kmodtool and lirc-kmod.spec attached, > containing only the essential changes that were made to accomplish this. > > http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-0.9.pre4.2.6.15_1.1858_FC5.src.rpm > http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-8.2.6.14_1.1656_FC4.src.rpm Looks quite good. One thing from your diff: > - [ -n "${kvariant}" ] || kvariant=up > - ksrc=%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kverrel}${kvariant#up}-%{_target_cpu} > + if [ -n "${kvariant#up}" ] ; then > + ksrc=%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kverrel}-$kvariant-%{_target_cpu} > + else > + kvariant=up > + ksrc=%{_usrsrc}/kernels/%{kverrel}-%{_target_cpu} > + fi /me really would like to avoid constructs like if [ -n "${kvariant#up}" ] ; then .... else .... fi It looks really a lot nicer without them IMHO. And, btw, do we really want to support both "up" and "" to build modules for the standard kernel (which, btw, in the case of x86-64 is in fact a smp kernel....)? We maybe should concentrate on one -- but "" looks a bit problematic and is sometimes a bit harder to handle (for users and people rebuilding the stuff)... CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 20 18:32:48 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:32:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060120183248.3FD8E80E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 8 gtkwave-1.3.82-1.fc3 lcms-1.15-1.fc3 prozilla-1.3.7.4-2.fc3 rxvt-unicode-7.1-1.fc3 scribus-1.2.4.1-1.fc3 torsmo-0.18-4.fc3 treecc-0.3.8-1.fc3 wine-docs-0.9.6-1.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 Fri Jan 20 18:33:04 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:33:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060120183304.3667A80E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 14 blender-2.40-1.fc4 gdesklets-0.35.3-1.1.fc4 gdesklets-0.35.3-2.fc4 gtkwave-1.3.82-1.fc4 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-7.fc4 kdesvn-0.7.2-1.fc4 lcms-1.15-1.fc4 licq-1.3.2-4 perl-Params-Validate-0.79-1.fc4 prozilla-1.3.7.4-2.fc4 rxvt-unicode-7.1-1.fc4 scribus-1.2.4.1-1.fc4 torsmo-0.18-4.fc4 treecc-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 Fri Jan 20 18:33:25 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:33:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060120183325.5B76480E7@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 20 azureus-2.3.0.6-15.fc5 byzanz-0.0.3-3.fc5 fbida-2.03-9.fc5 gdesklets-0.35.3-1.1.fc5 gdesklets-0.35.3-2.fc5 gtkwave-1.3.82-1.fc5 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-7.fc5 kdesvn-0.7.2-1.fc5 libupnp-1.2.1a-4.fc5 perl-Glib-1.103-1.fc5 perl-Gtk2-1.103-1.fc5 perl-String-Ediff-0.08-2.fc5 perl-Text-Iconv-1.4-3.fc5 prozilla-1.3.7.4-2.fc5 python-4Suite-XML-1.0-0.3.b3 rxvt-unicode-7.1-1.fc5 scribus-1.2.4.1-1.fc5 treecc-0.3.8-1.fc5 wine-docs-0.9.6-1.fc5 xforms-1.0.90-6.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 Fri Jan 20 18:52:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:52:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601201852.k0KIqUfm017121@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From Nicolas.Mailhot at laPoste.net 2006-01-20 13:52 EST ------- How about pushing the current version to FE so everyone can use the same reference package ? Then we can forget about the pre-inclusion versions -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 20 19:03:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:03:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601201903.k0KJ3RTY019095@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-20 14:03 EST ------- I used the first rpm you put up, had that error and then found your latest rpm, and did a rpm -U. An strace ends with problems for BDB and "Destroy". But I did install the FE BerkeleyDB rpm as well. My guess was this could be some missing perl dependancy, but I cannot figure out the package that would be missing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 20 19:21:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:21:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601201921.k0KJLlg9022436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-20 14:21 EST ------- One additional note, I don't think it should matter, but this is within a xen2 FC4 xenu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Fri Jan 20 20:52:09 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:52:09 +0100 Subject: make build gives plague-client connection refused, please kick buildsys Message-ID: <43D14D79.7040502@hhs.nl> The subject says it all I get: [hans at shalem devel]$ make build /usr/bin/plague-client build allegro allegro-4_2_0-3 devel Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' make: *** [build] Error 1 Regards, Hans From chabotc at xs4all.nl Fri Jan 20 20:55:26 2006 From: chabotc at xs4all.nl (Chris Chabot) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:55:26 +0100 Subject: make build gives plague-client connection refused, please kick buildsys In-Reply-To: <43D14D79.7040502@hhs.nl> References: <43D14D79.7040502@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1137790526.1992.1.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 21:52 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > The subject says it all I get: > > [hans at shalem devel]$ make build > /usr/bin/plague-client build allegro allegro-4_2_0-3 devel > Error connecting to build server: '(111, 'Connection refused')' > make: *** [build] Error 1 > > Regards, > > Hans > Hans i think this might have something to do with it: From: Dan Williams To: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com, fedora-maintainers at redhat.com Subject: Extras buildsystem maintenance (again) Hi, Buildsystem will be down for a while this afternoon (ie, around 1pm US EST) to tested fixes to the SSL hangs we've all cursed for the past week. Dan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... 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 Fri Jan 20 21:00:30 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:00:30 -0600 Subject: make build gives plague-client connection refused, please kick buildsys In-Reply-To: <43D14D79.7040502@hhs.nl> (Hans de Goede's message of "Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:52:09 +0100") References: <43D14D79.7040502@hhs.nl> Message-ID: >>>>> "HdG" == Hans de Goede writes: HdG> The subject says it all The announcement[1] did say it would be down for a bit today... 1) Message-Id: <1137776231.26970.0.camel at localhost.localdomain> - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 22:43:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:43:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601202243.k0KMhLYv030119@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-20 17:43 EST ------- Detailed review (not too vague this time) + mock succesfully built the source package. No errors reported + rpmlint did not complain. No warning nor errors reported + package follow the PackageNameGuideline procedure: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + tarball from source rpm matched source url listed on spec file. Both matched by md5sum and sha1sum + No error reported after install and removed package + License listed on SPEC file matches the source tarball : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Legal + SPEC file conform to PackagingGuideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines P.S: I got a lesson to be more detailed as 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 20 23:11:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:11:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173553] Review Request: xfce4-websearch-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601202311.k0KNBPhw002216@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-websearch-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173553 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-20 18:11 EST ------- + mock succesfully built the SRPM package. No error reported + rpmlint did not complain about warning and error. SPEC file conforms to PackagingGuideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines + tarball from source rpm matched source url listed on spec file. Both matched by md5sum and sha1sum + name of package conforms to PackageNameGuideline procedure: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + License listed on the SPEC file matches license on the tarball + no errors and crash reported after install and removal of the package Therefore the package is ready to be included in Fedora Extras. Set to 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 Fri Jan 20 23:16:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:16:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174065] Review Request: jabberd server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601202316.k0KNGkS7002985@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jabberd server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174065 ------- Additional Comments From nutello at sweetness.com 2006-01-20 18:16 EST ------- Is this supposed to appear in the FC3/4 repositories? It has been built for devel only. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 11:02:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 06:02:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211102.k0LB23Us024388@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-21 06:02 EST ------- Small side-note here: > The 'make' line in the specfile uses "-I /usr/include". > Please change this to"-I %{_includedir}". Preferably, neither one. /usr/include is in default search path list. By adding -I %{_includedir}, you defeat the purpose of a user defined search path list which takes precedence over the default search path 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 Jan 21 14:22:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:22:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177204] Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211422.k0LEMX4k014625@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: translate-toolkit - A collection of tools to assist software localization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177204 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-21 09:22 EST ------- Updated version. Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/translate-toolkit-0.8-0.5.rc5.src.rpm %changelog: * Sat Jan 21 2006 Roozbeh Pournader - 0.8-0.5.rc5 - Use sed instead of dos2unix * Mon Jan 09 2006 Roozbeh Pournader - 0.8-0.4.rc5 - Own forgotten subdirectories -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 15:48:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:48:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177507] Review Request: pida In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211548.k0LFmDu1023351@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-21 10:48 EST ------- - This >Requires: python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]") is not needed anymore -- works automatically in FC4 and later - Don't repeat the name of the package in the beginning of the summary - The license doesn't look like GPL - Description needs a linebreak after 80 chars - Description might be a bit to long - Change Requires: desktop-file-utils to BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils - In the future please add versions in the changelog entrys - why "Release: 0.2" and not "Release: 2"? - saw those warnings when starting pida: which: no pydoc in (/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin) which: no xemacs in (/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin) Are they relevant? - In the future please upload the srpms somewhere to the web and post only post links to it -- don't attach the packages in bugzilla (In reply to comment #5) > list of known issues: > - usually bicyclerepair would be required to load the python plugins but i left > the dependencys out since the plugins (browser/profiler/debugger) dont load > anyways. (will be fixed with 0.3.0) I would add it nevertheless -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ndbecker2 at gmail.com Sat Jan 21 16:05:25 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:05:25 -0500 Subject: How can I contribute? Message-ID: I've been fixing various packages to build on FC5. I'd like to contribute. It would be a waste for others to have to rediscover what I've already done. The problem is, I'm not in a position to be the maintainer of these projects. I'd just like to provide patches to someone else. Is there any mechanism to do this? From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Sat Jan 21 16:13:14 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:13:14 -0500 Subject: How can I contribute? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1137859994.12513.2.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 11:05 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > I've been fixing various packages to build on FC5. I'd like to contribute. > It would be a waste for others to have to rediscover what I've already > done. The problem is, I'm not in a position to be the maintainer of these > projects. I'd just like to provide patches to someone else. Is there any > mechanism to do this? Put them up on a web page and let people know about them. What happens from there is beyond your control. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 21 16:55:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169624] Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211655.k0LGteEe030861@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169624 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-21 11:55 EST ------- Where is the lastet SRPM? http://www.cgsecurity.org/fcextra/testdisk-6.2-1.src.rpm seems to be the old one. And if you need to re-upload/create it: could you remove the %doc as per comment #5 ? 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 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Jan 21 17:35:26 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:35:26 +0100 Subject: How can I contribute? In-Reply-To: <1137859994.12513.2.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1137859994.12513.2.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <43D270DE.7080407@hhs.nl> Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 11:05 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: >> I've been fixing various packages to build on FC5. I'd like to contribute. >> It would be a waste for others to have to rediscover what I've already >> done. The problem is, I'm not in a position to be the maintainer of these >> projects. I'd just like to provide patches to someone else. Is there any >> mechanism to do this? > > Put them up on a web page and let people know about them. What happens > from there is beyond your control. > > Or even better file bugreports for each program/package in FE bugzilla, with as Summary: "PATCH: fix FC5 compile" or a similar subject but make sure the Summary starts with PATCH: Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Jan 21 17:36:00 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:36:00 +0100 Subject: How can I contribute? In-Reply-To: <43D270DE.7080407@hhs.nl> References: <1137859994.12513.2.camel@ignacio.lan> <43D270DE.7080407@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <43D27100.3080508@hhs.nl> And attach the patch to the bugzilla ticker ofcourse. Regards, Hans Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: >> On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 11:05 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: >>> I've been fixing various packages to build on FC5. I'd like to >>> contribute. It would be a waste for others to have to rediscover what >>> I've already >>> done. The problem is, I'm not in a position to be the maintainer of >>> these >>> projects. I'd just like to provide patches to someone else. Is >>> there any >>> mechanism to do this? >> >> Put them up on a web page and let people know about them. What happens >> from there is beyond your control. >> >> > > Or even better file bugreports for each program/package in FE bugzilla, > with as Summary: "PATCH: fix FC5 compile" or a similar subject but make > sure the Summary starts with PATCH: > > Regards, > > Hans > From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 21 17:38:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 12:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175047] Review Request: NetworkManager-openvpn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211738.k0LHcdY7002776@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-21 12:38 EST ------- Couple of things: change /usr/bin/ to %{_bindir} Put a period at the end of your %description -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sat Jan 21 18:10:01 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:10:01 -0700 Subject: How can I contribute? References: Message-ID: <20060121181002.9DBB345438E@ningauble.scrye.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >>>>> "Neal" == Neal Becker writes: Neal> I've been fixing various packages to build on FC5. I'd like to Neal> contribute. It would be a waste for others to have to rediscover Neal> what I've already done. The problem is, I'm not in a position Neal> to be the maintainer of these projects. I'd just like to Neal> provide patches to someone else. Is there any mechanism to do Neal> this? Report bugs against the packages in bugzilla and attach your patches? That should get to the maintainer and not get lost. I'm working on rebuilding all the packages under current devel/mock. Will post some preliminary results in another thread. :) kevin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQFD0njs3imCezTjY0ERAr92AJ0fgVr3fAdAx0g7PoqAYQolwq5c6gCfaw7L N4PMILDFLnlwQbfIun+H/bY= =jy8j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 21 18:10:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 13:10:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178230] Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211810.k0LIA1pY005739@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oneko : Cat chases the cursor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178230 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-21 13:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Small side-note here: > > > The 'make' line in the specfile uses "-I /usr/include". > > Please change this to"-I %{_includedir}". > > Preferably, neither one. /usr/include is in default search path list. > By adding -I %{_includedir}, you defeat the purpose of a user defined > search path list which takes precedence over the default search path list. I verified that "-I %{_includedir}" isn't needed to build this package. It should be removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sat Jan 21 18:24:13 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:24:13 -0700 Subject: package rebuilding Message-ID: <20060121182415.812E545438E@ningauble.scrye.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greetings. I fired off a job a few days ago to just go through all the extras packages and rebuild them under mock/devel. It ran ok until this morning, when the broken dependencies in code/devel caused all the jobs to start failing. Of the 254 packages it got through before that: 204 built fine. 50 failed. The list of failed packages is available from: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/mock-broken.txt The common reasons for failure to build included: - - Modular X changes. - - compilier issues. - - upstream core packages changing/no longer available I will see about building all the rest over the coming weeks. Shall I file bugzilla bugs on these packages? kevin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQFD0nxP3imCezTjY0ERAl/yAKCXI+nMxBwu5aKsTPoBNyyEZqP28ACffT6f GcAgzuRJAbgZ3ucjJyTuXQI= =nhwK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 21 18:29:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 13:29:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169624] Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601211829.k0LITm1n007601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169624 grenier at cgsecurity.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL|http://www.cgsecurity.org/fc|http://www.cgsecurity.org/fc |extra/testdisk-6.2-1.src.rpm|extra/testdisk-6.2-2.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From grenier at cgsecurity.org 2006-01-21 13:29 EST ------- Done, %doc as been removed as per comment #5 Spec Url: http://www.cgsecurity.org/fcextra/testdisk.spec SRPM Url: http://www.cgsecurity.org/fcextra/testdisk-6.2-2.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 steve at silug.org Sat Jan 21 18:45:02 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 12:45:02 -0600 Subject: package rebuilding In-Reply-To: <20060121182415.812E545438E@ningauble.scrye.com> References: <20060121182415.812E545438E@ningauble.scrye.com> Message-ID: <20060121184502.GA4409@osiris.silug.org> On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 11:24:13AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Shall I file bugzilla bugs on these packages? If you can provide build logs for the failures in the bugzilla reports, then please do so. 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 Jan 21 19:31:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:31:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] New: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships 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=178568 Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/lacewing.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/lacewing-1.10-1.src.rpm Description: Asteroid like game where you can choose a type of ship and depending on the type of ship can pickup a number of upgrades during the game. Quoting from the webpage: "Lacewing is an arcade-style shoot-em-up which plays a little bit like a cross between Spacewar and Centipede. It has a decidedly retro style to it. It has a single-player mode, and also co-operative and duel modes for two players (split-screen)". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 20:33:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:33:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601212033.k0LKXbBm020989@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-21 15:33 EST ------- Couple of things -paths used where macro's should be %{_usr} and %{_bindir} -go ahead and move lacew.cfg to /etc -I would create a different rpm for the lwdata.zip -What license is lacewing.png released under? Where did it come from? -Would it make more sense just use the quote from the webpage as the entire description? -add || : to the end of your post and postun commands. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 21:50:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:50:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173553] Review Request: xfce4-websearch-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601212150.k0LLogqS028507@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-websearch-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173553 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-21 16:50 EST ------- Thanks. Please don't forget to change the status to "Assigned" when you review a 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 Sat Jan 21 22:04:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:04:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601212204.k0LM4wYj029986@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-21 17:04 EST ------- Mike wrote: -paths used where macro's should be %{_usr} and %{_bindir} I could replace /usr with %{prefix} in the make commands, yes, but where do you want to use %{_bindir) ? -go ahead and move lacew.cfg to /etc I don't want to polute /etc with this its not a garbage-bin, I'm working on several packages like this one, which all have a similar scheme. -I would create a different rpm for the lwdata.zip Why, this is the only game which uses it and it won't run without it. -What license is lacewing.png released under? Where did it come from? I created it with gthumb from a bmp in lwdata.zip, license is thus GPL -Would it make more sense just use the quote from the webpage as the entire description? Not in my opinion -add || : to the end of your post and postun commands. Will do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 22:13:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:13:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601212213.k0LMDiXd030701@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-21 17:13 EST ------- Under post and postun you have : /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache I would change this to %{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 21 22:17:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:17:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601212217.k0LMHSUG031119@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 michael at knox.net.nz changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michael at knox.net.nz ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-21 17:17 EST ------- Under FC5test2 updated to 22nd Jan, gnomebaker is not looking good. [monkey at hailstorm ~]$ gnomebaker (gnomebaker:23334): Gtk-WARNING **: gtkwidget.c:4205: widget not within a GtkWindow (gnomebaker:23334): Gtk-WARNING **: Theme directory 16x16/status16x16/stock/chart of theme gnome has no size field *** glibc detected *** gnomebaker: free(): invalid pointer: 0x09ef6468 *** [monkey at hailstorm ~]$ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 00:08:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:08:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220008.k0M08dJf009228@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-21 19:08 EST ------- this seems to be mostly fixed in CVS. Unable to do a CVS checkout at the moment. Ubuntu's drapper source's (CVS 2005-01-10 0.5.1) seem to work. Would this be suitable for use (the CVS snapshot)? I can redo the srpm against it if there is no one else too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 00:13:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:13:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220013.k0M0DZkV009642@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-21 19:13 EST ------- I'm pretty sure CVS snapshots are acceptable. Be sure that it works otherwise, though, and is packaged according to the snapshot packaging guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#head-975237cdcb9aa7775601adeaaccbc70290f69812 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 00:25:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:25:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220025.k0M0PNfq010776@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-21 19:25 EST ------- Luke's gearing up for another release fairly soon, so I'm inclined not to use a CVS snapshot. Regardless, I'm probably not gonna have time to look at this for another week or so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sun Jan 22 02:12:32 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:12:32 -0700 (MST) Subject: package rebuilding References: <20060121182415.812E545438E@ningauble.scrye.com> <20060121184502.GA4409@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <20060121.191232.76107489.kevin@scrye.com> >>>>> "Steven" == Steven Pritchard writes: Steven> On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 11:24:13AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Shall I file bugzilla bugs on these packages? Steven> If you can provide build logs for the failures in the bugzilla Steven> reports, then please do so. I can... I have them all saved off. Will file bugreports as time permits then... kevin From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 02:13:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:13:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220213.k0M2DZnM021201@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-21 21:13 EST ------- Understnad, However, I was in need of a CD/DVD burning app and did not want to use K3b. My preference is for gnomebaker. I modified the srpm and spec, bit can be review from here: http://www.knox.net.nz/fedora_stuff/gnomebaker-0.5.1-1.20050110cvs.fc4.src.rpm http://www.knox.net.nz/fedora_stuff/gnomebaker.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 Sun Jan 22 02:13:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:13:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220213.k0M2Dbbp021223@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-21 21:13 EST ------- rpmlint output: E: lacewing file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/lacewing/lacew.cfg W: lacewing wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/lacewing-1.10/readme.txt W: lacewing wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/lacewing-1.10/licence.txt You should run %{__sed} -i 's/\r//' on these two files to fix the line endings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 05:01:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:01:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220501.k0M51isL003559@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-22 00:01 EST ------- I appreciate your enthusiasm Michael, but I'm not comfortable with using a cvs version for it's initial review, given all the changes being made in this version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 05:05:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:05:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220505.k0M55wVd003972@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-22 00:05 EST ------- Not a problem. Its there, changes for the new version with regards to the patches and FC5 have been made to 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 dcbw at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 06:34:39 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:34:39 -0500 Subject: Extras buildsystem maintenance (again) In-Reply-To: <1137776231.26970.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1137776231.26970.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137911679.15096.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 11:57 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > Hi, > > Buildsystem will be down for a while this afternoon (ie, around 1pm US > EST) to tested fixes to the SSL hangs we've all cursed for the past > week. The buildsystem is back up at this time. There will be further downtime in the next few days to upgrade the builders themselves (and bring hammer3 back from the dead). Please continue to post timeout messages from plague-client if you get them, so I can be alerted to problems as they arise. Thanks for the patience, Dan (PS - Rawhide is broken right now due to udev->hotplug dependency, so your builds there will fail. FYI) From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 06:39:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:39:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177619] Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220639.k0M6dRX3012505@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-22 01:39 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Not a full review yet, but random suggestions for the beginning: > - The license file looks to be a stripped version of GPL, which is illegal to > redistribute, as GPL only allows verbatim copies. I suggest contacting upstream. I'm currently in contact with them. > - I get a warning during build: > /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/nltk_lite/parse/chunk.py:1247: SyntaxWarning: > import * only allowed at module level Bogus. > - You should perhaps use 'install -d' instead of 'mkdir -p' Not necessary. Updated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 08:34:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 03:34:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220834.k0M8YALI023106@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-22 03:33 EST ------- http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/w3c-libwww.spec http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/w3c-libwww-5.4.0-16.src.rpm Updated with your suggestions :) Lets see how the other submission progresses... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 09:12:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 04:12:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601220912.k0M9Cr9R026496@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-22 04:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > rpmlint output: > E: lacewing file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/lacewing/lacew.cfg Given that this file basically just provides a set of default options, I would either: (a) not mark it as a config file, or (b) move it to /etc the idea being that /usr should be able to be mounted read-only. So if it's a file that's expected to be edited at some time, it should go in /etc, and if not it can stay in /usr but not be marked %config. (In reply to comment #3) > Under post and postun you have : > > /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache > > I would change this to > > %{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache I would advise against this. I used to do that sort of thing myself but was convinced not to do so. The reason is that by keeping %{_bindir} etc. for use only as targets for installation of files, someone can rebuild the package from the SRPM and specify different destination directories, e.g. $ rpmbuild --rebuild --define '_bindir /myapps' package.spec and get the binaries installed where they want them. If you make changes like the one suggested in comment #3, this will fail unless the package builder has also installed gtk-update-icon-cache in the same place that they want to install this package to. So I'd leave it as /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 22 09:54:30 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 04:54:30 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060122095430.C9B797FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 libupnp-1.2.1a-4.fc3 plague-0.4.3-3.fc3 tclhttpd-3.5.1-7.fc3 wine-0.9.6-1.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 Jan 22 09:54:49 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 04:54:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060122095449.352D27FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 9 amarok-1.3.8-1.fc4 grisbi-0.5.8-1.fc4 libupnp-1.2.1a-4.fc4 perl-Module-Signature-0.52-1.fc4 plague-0.4.3-3.fc4 python-sqlite2-2.1.0-1.fc4 scribus-1.2.4.1-2.fc4 tclhttpd-3.5.1-7.fc4 wine-0.9.6-1.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 Sun Jan 22 11:53:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:53:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178604] New: Review Request: ruby-mysql 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=178604 Summary: Review Request: ruby-mysql Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: oliver.andrich at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql-2.7-1.src.rpm Description: A Ruby interface to MySQL This is the MySQL API module for Ruby. It provides the same functions for Ruby programs that the MySQL C API provides for C 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 Sun Jan 22 11:55:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:55:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169624] Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221155.k0MBtxVr020851@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: TestDisk, tool to check and undelete partition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169624 fedora at leemhuis.info changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-22 06:55 EST ------- Review of d92f0ba26cf4e1c8bb276a38b9dbe376d6599004 testdisk-6.2-2.src.rpm $ rpmlint rpmbuild/*PMS/{,*/}testdisk*6.2-2* W: testdisk incoherent-version-in-changelog 5.0 6.2-2 This is harmless, but you should do it correctly in the future ;-) Review: - Souce testdisk-6.2.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream - Builds fine in mock - License is allowed in FE, correct in the spec file and shipped as %doc - name follows PackageNamingGuidelines - Spec looks good - File list looks good - Works for me - dir ownership OK - permissions OK - clean OK APPROVED; Create an account in the accounts system -- 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 Sun Jan 22 12:09:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:09:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221209.k0MC9AnY021991@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-22 07:08 EST ------- on fc4 I get: rpmbuild -bb gnomebaker.spec Error: /home/dragoran/rpm/SPECS/gnomebaker.spec:16: parseExpressionBoolean returns -1 Error: Package has no %description: gnomebaker -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 12:15:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221215.k0MCFAbl022591@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-22 07:14 EST ------- I've created a new version with all above comments taken into account: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/lacewing.spec http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/lacewing-1.10-2.src.rpm See the changelog in the specfile for all the changes as thunderbird in rawhide currently has broken cut and paste support. Regarding %{_bindir} and comment 5 , I agree with comment 5, the wiki scriplets page however suggests using %{_bindir} so I have done that. One last note if you try to build this on Rawhide, allegro-devel is currently broken on rawhide. It is fixed in CVS but can't be build because of buildsys trouble. So todo a testbuild of this package on rawhide, first checkout allegro from CVS, build that locally and install it. Also note that rawhide mockbuilds will also fail because of this and because rawhide has broken deps internally. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 22 13:01:01 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:01:01 +0200 Subject: RFC: kernel-modules in Fedora Extras In-Reply-To: <1137777873.7245.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1136543456.3146.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136563963.5157.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136564785.3146.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136638257.2716.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1136639550.30348.14.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1136668740.2509.12.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1136742531.2665.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137135583.19680.73.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137166067.2849.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137276045.22283.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137435323.2801.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137528327.28950.138.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1137777873.7245.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1137934861.19621.38.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 18:24 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > /me really would like to avoid constructs like > > if [ -n "${kvariant#up}" ] ; then > .... > else > .... > fi > > It looks really a lot nicer without them IMHO. Well, the alternatives with the same functionailty looked much worse in my opinion :) > And, btw, do we really want to support both "up" and "" to build modules > for the standard kernel I don't think that's necessary any more. Maybe some older implementations required it, dunno. Newest versions with "up" == "" support removed and the cleanups made possible by that done (as well as some unneeded bashisms removed): http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/thinkpad-kmod-5.8-9.2.6.14_1.1656_FC4.src.rpm http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/lirc-kmod-0.8.0-1.2.6.15_1.1864_FC5.src.rpm lirc is in much better shape now, it got a upstream version bump and adjustments for 2.6.16-rc. thinkpad still doesn't compile on Rawhide, but diff from it attached because it's more to the point for the purpose of this discussion. Unless there are objections, I'd like to go ahead and commit the above packages plus the -common ones to CVS. Obviously, no builds yet, buildsys still needs some work to be able to produce the kmod packages we're expecting. By the way, in case everyone's not aware of it yet, there are two newish bugs that have an effect on packaging and using the kmod* packages: - yum's installonlyn plugin apparently disregards dependencies: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176257 - missing .kernelrelease file in Rawhide kernel-devel packages: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178491 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: thinkpad-kmod.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 3775 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 14:23:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:23:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221423.k0MENU3g003450@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-22 09:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Regarding %{_bindir} and comment 5 , I agree with comment 5, the wiki scriplets > page however suggests using %{_bindir} so I have done that. Normally I would just fix the wiki scriptlets page but it appears that Ville Skytt? was the person that changed /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache to %{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache there (revision 17), and I respect Ville's opinions so it'd be interesting if he could expand on why he made that 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 Sun Jan 22 17:32:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:32:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221732.k0MHW5VM022162@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-22 12:31 EST ------- %{?dist} was used to seperate buildrequires under fc4 and fc5. Please rebuild using --define "dist fc4" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 17:39:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:39:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221739.k0MHdUqH023079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-22 12:39 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19) > %{?dist} was used to seperate buildrequires under fc4 and fc5. > > Please rebuild using --define "dist fc4" The extras buildsystem will define "%{?dist}" as ".fc4" or ".fc5", not just "fc4" or "fc5". See the "Conditionals" section of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag for how to do distribution-specific builds. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 17:49:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:49:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170973] Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221749.k0MHncrt024041@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomebaker: Gnome CD/DVD burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170973 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-01-22 12:49 EST ------- I know. But if you want to rebuild it outside the buildsys, then using the define flag will be needed. I had read that url and spoke with people in #fedora-extras and the method used was the method suggested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 18:08:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:08:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221808.k0MI8EEX025758@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-22 13:07 EST ------- Apparently the text UI isn't really an UI (where you select commands from lists or something) but a shell (where you write the next command) (launched with command "smart --shell" when the GUI is started with command "smart --gui"). So I'd say the package names could be smart-shell and smart-gui for those subpackages (at least all users would know instantly what the subpackages would be for). Whether it is possible to separate those from the main package is another issue (what if you don't have the gui package installed and you run "smart --gui" - I hope you won't be seeing a segfault at least). But just my opinion about the naming. Hope to see smart/smartpm in the repo soon so we can start using it in production. Thanx. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 18:11:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:11:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178604] Review Request: ruby-mysql In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221811.k0MIB1RW026123@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mysql https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178604 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-22 13:10 EST ------- Couple of things -Duplicate build requires: openssl-devel is provided by mysql-devel zlib-devel is provided by openssl-devel -Should clean the build root in %install (add 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 18:40:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:40:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178604] Review Request: ruby-mysql In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221840.k0MIe4Y7028940@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mysql https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178604 ------- Additional Comments From oliver.andrich at gmail.com 2006-01-22 13:39 EST ------- Fixed these things. Spec Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql-2.7-3.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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 18:46:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:46:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601221846.k0MIkm4l029570@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-22 13:46 EST ------- What makes Gnome so special that you *expect* a 'gsmarttray' package? There is no Emacs module or Enlightment applet neither... See the first comments about splitting the text/gtk functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 18:52:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 13:52:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] New: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like 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=178625 Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/overgod.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/overgod-1.0-1.src.rpm Author's Description: For too long has humanity been ruled by cruel and disputatious gods! Fly through the various layers of the Celestial Oversphere to unseat those who control the universe. This is my latest game, Overgod. It's similar to my last game, Lacewing, but better in almost every way. Basically, you control a little vehicle in the middle of the screen and fly around and shoot things - a bit like asteroids, but the asteroids move independently and shoot back. You can also upgrade your vehicle in various ways. Some notes: I created the icon with gthumb from a bmp in SOURCE0, the license is thus GPL. If you try to build this on Rawhide, allegro-devel is currently broken on rawhide. It is fixed in CVS but can't be build because of buildsys trouble. So todo a testbuild of this package on rawhide, first checkout allegro from CVS, build that locally and install it. Also note that rawhide mockbuilds will also fail because of this and because rawhide has broken deps internally. The cfg file is only used for the initial defaults, after the first start all settings are read from and saved to ~/.overgod.cfg, thus it is not marked %config, also see the discussion in bug 178568 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 20:27:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:27:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175848] Review Request: xfce4-taskmanager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222027.k0MKR3wo008210@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-taskmanager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175848 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-22 15:26 EST ------- Built fine for Core 3 and 4 on all arches, Rawhide is inconsistent atm. Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 20:31:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:31:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173549] Review Request: xfce4-mount-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222031.k0MKVZK4008645@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mount-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173549 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-22 15:31 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > > I used both md5sum and sha1sum one should be enough ;) Updated the package to 0.3.3 after import into cvs. 0.3.3-1 builds fine on Core 3 and 4, rawhide is inconsistent atm. Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 20:44:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:44:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173553] Review Request: xfce4-websearch-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222044.k0MKicdX010043@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-websearch-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173553 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-22 15:44 EST ------- Package builds fine fore core 3 and 4 so far, rawhide is inconsistent atm. Will do the devel builds in a few days. Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 22 20:57:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:57:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173552] Review Request: xfce4-sensors-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222057.k0MKvxsU011468@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sensors-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173552 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-22 15:57 EST ------- Add "ExcludeArch: ppc" (there is no lm_sensors for power pc.) Builds fine now. 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 Sun Jan 22 21:08:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:08:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: adplug-xmms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222108.k0ML8QHO012613@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178360 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-22 16:08 EST ------- The package should be named xmms-adplug: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#head-b624c4531e7a94b9b2c5a2914635e0ad64cda0a6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 22 22:08:56 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:08:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060122220856.611337FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 6 fetchlog-1.0-2.fc3 xfce4-mount-plugin-0.3.3-1.fc3 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-2.fc3 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-3.fc3 xfce4-taskmanager-0.3.1-3.fc3 xfce4-websearch-plugin-0.1.0-4.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 Sun Jan 22 22:09:25 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:09:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060122220925.0DBA57FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 showimg-0.9.5-4.fc4 wp_tray-0.5.1-1.fc4 xfce4-mount-plugin-0.3.3-1.fc4 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-3.fc4 xfce4-taskmanager-0.3.1-2.fc4 xfce4-websearch-plugin-0.1.0-4.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Sun Jan 22 22:38:11 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:38:11 +0100 Subject: SSL connection errors to plague-server Message-ID: <87slrfkhws.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Hello, somehow, SSL connections to plague-server are broken currently. When the sent request is <1024 bytes it seems to hang forever. Reproducible e.g. by: ---------- $ cat >xmldata < examples.getStateName 41 EOF $ curl -0 -v --data-ascii "$(cat xmldata)" --cert ~/.fedora.cert \ --cacert ~/.fedora-server-ca.cert --key ~/.fedora.cert -k -3 \ https://buildsys.fedoraproject.org:8887/RPC2 ---------- When the '' placeholder is kept as-is (--> <1024 Bytes), curl won't return. Filling it with some chars make curl return correctly. Related code for a curl-based plague-client worked a week ago but hangs now. Enrico -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 480 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 22 23:13:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:13:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173550] Review Request: xfce4-netload-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222313.k0MNDt9Y024678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-netload-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173550 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-22 18:13 EST ------- More detailed review: + mock succesfully build the package without noticeable error + rpmlint did not report any error nor warning + tarball from SRPM matched source tarball for URL listed on SPEC file through md5 and sha1 + binary package installed and removed without noticeable issue + name of the package/SPEC files follow PackagingGuide and PackageNameGuideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + License listed on SPEC file matched the license in the tarball and it is GPL Accordingly, the package is ready to be included on Fedora 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 Jan 22 23:17:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:17:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173661] Review Request: xfce4-fsguard-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601222317.k0MNHsku025103@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-fsguard-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173661 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-22 18:17 EST ------- More detailed review: + mock succesfully build the package without noticeable error + rpmlint did not report any error nor warning + tarball from SRPM matched source tarball for URL listed on SPEC file through md5 and sha1 + binary package installed and removed without noticeable issue + name of the package/SPEC files follow PackagingGuide and PackageNameGuideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + License listed on SPEC file matched the license in the tarball and it is GPL-compatible http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses Accordingly, the package is ready to be included on Fedora 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 dcbw at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 00:12:55 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:12:55 -0500 Subject: SSL connection errors to plague-server In-Reply-To: <87slrfkhws.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> References: <87slrfkhws.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Message-ID: <1137975176.8116.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 23:38 +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote: > Hello, > > somehow, SSL connections to plague-server are broken currently. When > the sent request is <1024 bytes it seems to hang forever. What plague version? You may need to update to 0.4.3-3 to get things to work smoothly... It's available for fc4 and fc3, rawhide is broken so I wasn't able to push a build through for that. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 04:15:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:15:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178668] New: Review Request: numpy: A fast multidimensional array facility 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=178668 Summary: Review Request: numpy: A fast multidimensional array facility for Python Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: ivazquez at ivazquez.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/numpy.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/numpy-0.9.4-1.src.rpm Description: The Numeric Python extensions is a set of extensions to the Python programming language which allows Python programmers to efficiently manipulate large sets of objects organized in grid-like fashion. These sets of objects are called arrays, and they can have any number of dimensions: one dimensional arrays are similar to standard Python sequences, two-dimensional arrays are similar to matrices from linear algebra. Note that one-dimensional arrays are also different from any other Python sequence, and that two-dimensional matrices are also different from the matrices of linear algebra. This package also contains a version of f2py that works properly with 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 Mon Jan 23 05:20:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178668] Review Request: numpy: A fast multidimensional array facility for Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601230520.k0N5K2Wb031115@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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: A fast multidimensional array facility for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178668 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-23 00:19 EST ------- Hi Ignacio, this is just a very quick look, not a full review: good: + source matches upstream + specfile looks sane + license looks OK needswork: - the license should probably (?) be in %doc - in %build, CFLAGS is set twice (redundant) - build on FC-4 fails with this message: + /usr/bin/python -c 'import pkg_resources, numpy ; numpy.test(1, 1)' Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in ? ImportError: No module named pkg_resources error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.44127 (%check) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mike.j.knox at gmail.com Mon Jan 23 07:43:00 2006 From: mike.j.knox at gmail.com (Michael Knox) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:43:00 +1300 Subject: Is anjuta orphaned? Message-ID: Hello all, I noticed that anjuta is listed on the orphaned packages page of the wiki. I would like to take ownership of this if there is no objections, as I use anjuta at work. Thanks Michael -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ankit644 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 23 07:48:24 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:48:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Problem with building my new package ! Message-ID: <20060123074824.74771.qmail@web34602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi list, I am having a problem with getting a new relese of package system-config-control. Here are the steps i followed: 1. Modified the system-config-control.spec with changing the release no. "Releasse: 4%{?dist}" 2. cvs up; cvs commit -m "Updated spec file" 3. make tag build, which gave me a message "Package system-config-control enqueued. (However no Job ID was provided in the time required)" If i did anything wrong, please give me some inputs on this. Thank You! Ankit Patel --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Mon Jan 23 08:05:37 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:05:37 +0100 Subject: Problem with building my new package ! In-Reply-To: <20060123074824.74771.qmail@web34602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060123074824.74771.qmail@web34602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43D48E51.5010501@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ankit Patel wrote: > Here are the steps i followed: > 1. Modified the system-config-control.spec with changing the release no. > "Releasse: 4%{?dist}" > 2. cvs up; cvs commit -m "Updated spec file" > 3. make tag build, which gave me a message "Package > system-config-control enqueued. (However no Job ID was provided in the > time required)" Sounds about right. > If i did anything wrong, please give me some inputs on this. No you did not do anything wrong. The buildsystem is stuck again. Once somebody restarts it you will be able to enque jobs again. In addition: rawhide is broken so builds will fail because of broken deps atm. - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD1I5RQEQyPsWM8csRAg8zAKCEaclkHh0tzKHP0DQKgc6A6U3olQCfT1+7 xyPMBLfyyXold4PY3AXK1EM= =Sj+f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 08:01:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:01:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174065] Review Request: jabberd server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601230801.k0N81v9N016847@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jabberd server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174065 ------- Additional Comments From adrian at lisas.de 2006-01-23 03:01 EST ------- > Is this supposed to appear in the FC3/4 repositories? It has been built for > devel only. Not is hasn't. This is also available for FC4. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 08:54:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:54:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601230854.k0N8shEK023962@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 03:54 EST ------- Of course I don't expect the packager to provide the gnome applet. But I hope upstream will provide it in the future (there is a bug about this in smart bug tracker IIRC). That "GUI is not GUI" was a bit weird comment. It is a GUI written using gtk libraries. I think there are other graphical user interface packages in the fedora repositories which are named like *-gui and which require gtk. Well, there are also *-gtk packages. I guess there is no policy about this thing. But I think the amount of the *-gui packages is a bit higher than the amount of *-gtk packages. So what happens if I don't have the graphical user interface package installed and I run "smart --gui"? Sorry, I would know that if I'd install. But I'm waiting for the official fedora extras version of smart. ;) Are you saying rpm has a bug that it allows executing the post scripts in wrong order when installing multiple packages at once? Even if that's true, I wonder why are you trying to fix it here with the Requires(pre/postun) stuff. You should be filing a bug against rpm (or yum/apt-rpm/smart if the bug appears using them) instead. I wonder why you need root permissions to just check if there are new updates available. Well, I know why. Because "smart update" needs root permission to download the new repo data. I'm just wondering why smart can't just check if the repo data is even newer on the servers (you can do that with HTTP headers). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 10:14:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:14:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173552] Review Request: xfce4-sensors-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231014.k0NAEM1T002252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-sensors-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173552 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-23 05:14 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Add "ExcludeArch: ppc" (there is no lm_sensors for power pc.) see bug #178680 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 10:24:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:24:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231024.k0NAOXSR003537@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 05:24 EST ------- from #smart: jval: because it would only know that there is new repo data available, but not if it affects any of your installed packages that was related to the smart applet which just checks if there are updates available but true, even though there would be a newer repo data it would not necessarily mean new updates for the particular user exactly it could get the update into some sort of private repository, but that's expensive diskspace-wise true -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 10:34:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:34:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231034.k0NAYtwf005181@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-23 05:34 EST ------- ran "./build-utils/bootstrap" in the nucleo source dir to generate the configure script. The source built foe me with a a rpmbuild -ba nucleo.spec but was unsucessfull with mock here is a link for the rpms i was able to build and the spec file used http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/nucleo-1232006/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 11:56:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 06:56:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231156.k0NBuCCU018739@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 06:55 EST ------- from #smart: smart is the executable name, and will continue to be.. Naming the package after the main executable is usually a good idea, when at all feasible So yes, I suggest to use "smart".. niemeyer = Gustavo Niemeyer (smart lead developer), so we heard the official word. This package is "smart" and that's final. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 12:10:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:10:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170131] Review Request: php-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231210.k0NCAV98020409@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170131 ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-01-23 07:10 EST ------- ping? :) FC3 has died now, hoping it will simplify the 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 Mon Jan 23 12:40:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:40:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc & performance analysis tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231240.k0NCeLev024487@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-01-23 07:40 EST ------- > I suspect that this application may rely on Linuxthreads, which are going away > in development, instad of NPTL. I've tried "make check" with "LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.2.9" (/lib/libc.so) and with "LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.9" (/lib/i686/libc.so). Both was failed as well as with /lib/tls/libc.so . In different places... Now we see that the "make check" result depends on the compiler optimisation options and also depends on the LD_ASSUME_KERNEL variants. All the results are failure in the different places. Maybe email upstream about these 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 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Jan 23 13:27:22 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:27:22 +0100 Subject: Buildsystem stuck? Message-ID: <43D4D9BA.9060603@hhs.nl> Hi all, make build gives: /usr/bin/plague-client build allegro allegro-4_2_0-3 devel Package allegro enqueued. (However, no Job ID was provided in the time required) Can someone kick the buildsys please. Regards, Hans From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Jan 23 13:24:15 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:24:15 +0000 Subject: Handling a - in a version number Message-ID: <1138022655.28244.63.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I'm trying to get a spec file together for a package which includes a - in the package version (2.0-0.10). When I put that into a spec file, rpmbuild complains and exits. Is there a way to get around this? I have defined version as 2.0 and added a macro for 0.10 for the source code line, but obviously, when that gets untar'd, only the 2.0 is used. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at city-fan.org Mon Jan 23 13:28:17 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:28:17 +0000 Subject: Handling a - in a version number In-Reply-To: <1138022655.28244.63.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138022655.28244.63.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43D4D9F1.6070901@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to get a spec file together for a package which includes a - > in the package version (2.0-0.10). When I put that into a spec file, > rpmbuild complains and exits. Is there a way to get around this? You need to use something other than a "-", such as a "_" > I have defined version as 2.0 and added a macro for 0.10 for the source > code line, but obviously, when that gets untar'd, only the 2.0 is used. What's the name of the tarball, and what's the name of the directory it extracts into? Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 15:25:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:25:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170131] Review Request: php-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231525.k0NFPlOG017838@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-extras - Additional PHP modules from the standard PHP distribution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170131 ------- Additional Comments From sundaram at redhat.com 2006-01-23 10:25 EST ------- (In reply to comment #16) > ping? :) > > FC3 has died now, hoping it will simplify the review... For FC packages they are now being maintained in legacy. For Extras, it is upto the package maintainer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 16:25:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:25:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231625.k0NGPBEc029031@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-23 11:24 EST ------- Should the sed replacement under %prep be in %build instead? I also could not get this to build on FC4. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 17:51:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:51:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] New: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL 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=178709 Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl-0.0.1-1.src.rpm Description: A project to develop a free, open source, GPL'ed VHDL simulator for Linux. rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm E: freehdl invalid-dependency /usr/local/bin/perl E: freehdl info-files-without-install-info-postin /usr/share/info/fire.info.gz E: freehdl info-files-without-install-info-postun /usr/share/info/fire.info.gz E: freehdl wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gvhdl "/usr/local/bin/perl" rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-devel-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm W: freehdl-devel no-documentation W: freehdl-devel non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/freehdl-config 0644 E: freehdl-devel non-executable-script /usr/bin/freehdl-config 0644 W: freehdl-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so libieee.so.0.0.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 18:11:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:11:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231811.k0NIBqTk014840@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-23 13:11 EST ------- Not in my book, it just converts a text format, something which could be done with a patch too (I've even concidered doing it in a patch). Nothing is being build here. Actually I've seen rpm's where even ./configure is in %prep, but thats just plain wrong. How / where does it fail with which message? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ndbecker2 at gmail.com Mon Jan 23 18:42:19 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:42:19 -0500 Subject: cephes-1.3 would anyone like to adopt this? Message-ID: I placed my srpm here: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/cephes-1.3-1.src.rpm cephes is a well-know small library of useful numerical special functions. Would anyone care to adopt this? From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 18:54:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:54:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231854.k0NIsWaG024586@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-23 13:54 EST ------- Looks like your allegro is busted. It compiles fine on devel unfortunatly tou can't compile the allegro SRPM from devel on FC4 since it BuildRequires the new modular Xorg stuff. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 19:01:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:01:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231901.k0NJ12iV025576@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-23 14:00 EST ------- -freehdl-config should be set executable -See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets under Texinfo for information about getting rid of the "info-files-without-install-info" errors -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 19:12:12 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:12:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060123191212.5E0B3808B@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 1 moodss-21.0-1.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 Mon Jan 23 19:42:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:42:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231942.k0NJgfiP000674@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-23 14:42 EST ------- I updated the files without changing the release number : rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm E: freehdl invalid-dependency /usr/local/bin/perl E: freehdl wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gvhdl "/usr/local/bin/perl" I need to change /usr/local/bin/perl to /usr/bin/perl with sed but i don't know how to do this. Help needed. Please. rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-devel-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm W: freehdl-devel no-documentation W: freehdl-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so libieee.so.0.0.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 19:45:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:45:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231945.k0NJjcQi001063@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 14:45 EST ------- I have only one thing I'd like to see changed in the spec file before it is approved: I strongly think packages should always state all their dependencies. You should not assume anything. Smart requires rpm-python (well, at least in fedora it does), in this case >= 4.3 (or is it 4.4 after all?). That should be in the spec file. rpm-build >= 4.3 should be in build requirements because older versions won't build this package (was it 4.3 or 4.4?). I suggest adding these for the main package: Requires: rpm-python >= 4.3 BuildRequires: rpm-build >= 4.3 Other than this, I'd say the spec is ok and ready for release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 19:58:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:58:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601231958.k0NJwXd7003689@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 14:58 EST ------- One thing though. :) Does the applet allow running "smart update" by normal users? By _all_ users? That is not safe (I know it does not do any serious harm, but you should still not allow it by default - even though it only updates the cache - cache updates should be controlled by the superuser). Actually the applet should not run "smart update". There should be a cron job which does that. The applet should just check if there are new updates - without trying to update the local cache. If the applet would just do that, it would not need root permissions. Of course you need root permissions to actually upgrade the packages, but then you launch the gui which asks password with consolehelper. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 20:50:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:50:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232050.k0NKohwo013829@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-23 15:50 EST ------- Folks, the comments here are getting exceedingly verbose, let's try to keep things a bit more concise, ok? :) To summarize, there are multiple items in the latest package that are against (what I perceive as) the concensus between various reviewers: - -usermode should be folded into the main package - add >= 4.3 versions to rpm-python and rpm-build dependencies - Requires(pre/postun) abuses should be pruned - -gtk should be renamed to -gui FWIW, I'm not going to approve the package as long as it directly contradicts several independent reviewer comments. On the other hand, I don't insist being the "assigned to" reviewer here either... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:18:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:18:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232118.k0NLIj9J018890@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 16:18 EST ------- My opinions: - -usermode should be folded into the main package * No because the graphical user interface and applet packages only require it and will bring it in when needed. We don't want new dependencies for the main package if they aren't really needed. - add >= 4.3 versions to rpm-python and rpm-build dependencies * Yes because this package requires those (rpm-python >= 4.3 for running it, rpm-build >= 4.3 for building it). - Requires(pre/postun) abuses should be pruned * Yes because you should not try to fix rpm/yum/apt bugs here. This is not a blocker for me though because they don't break anything. - -gtk should be renamed to -gui * Yes because it tells the user what it is for. You should think like the user here, not like the developer (User knows that she wants to run "smart --gui". She doesn't know which toolset/library the --gui uses.). Any comments about the applet and root permissions issue? I wonder why it is implemented like that when a cron job for the package database/cache (whatever it is called) update (I mean "smart update") would simplify things a lot. And make it much more secure too (you would need root permissions to change anything). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:22:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:22:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232122.k0NLMpLC019796@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-23 16:22 EST ------- > Does the applet allow running "smart update" by normal users? By > _all_ users? Yes, no. ======= > - -usermode should be folded into the main package -usermode introduces additional, non-trivial dependencies and is not needed for core functionality. Therefore, it must be in a separate package. > - add >= 4.3 versions to rpm-python and rpm-build dependencies I guess, this is used to require a certain upstream version. But rpm lost its ability to require a certain *upstream* version some years ago when it was changed to non-existing-epoch == Epoch: 0. Every supported environment (FC-4+) has an rpm version >= 4.3, so the versioning does not make sense. > - Requires(pre/postun) abuses should be pruned When a package fills files into a directory which is not owned by this package, it MUST be made sure that this directory exists BEFORE the package is unpackaged. Ditto for uninstalling. Requires(pre/postun) is the only way which *guarantees* that. > - -gtk should be renamed to -gui I heard no technical reasons for that and because I like '-gtk' more, I am not going to change that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:30:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:30:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232130.k0NLUGxa021259@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From sundaram at redhat.com 2006-01-23 16:29 EST ------- Hi > > > > - -gtk should be renamed to -gui > > I heard no technical reasons for that and because I like '-gtk' more, > I am not going to change that. one reason not to name it after the toolkit is that the details about which toolkit it is written in is not very relevant to the user. If a few tools are written in gtk and other few are written in qt, fltk and so on and if all of them are *-gui then it enforces some consistently. Also note that a number of packages within FC already follow this convention which users are accustomed towards. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:31:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:31:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175980] Review Request: w3c-libwww In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232131.k0NLVp4S021693@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175980 ------- Additional Comments From dcantrel at redhat.com 2006-01-23 16:31 EST ------- The other package was originally in Extras and it only makes sense for that one to go back in to Extras. No sense in recreating the wheel if it's already been done. Go ahead and add the one mentioned in bug 178310. 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 Mon Jan 23 21:35:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:35:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232135.k0NLZfxh022803@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-23 16:35 EST ------- Re: comment 47: those arguments have already been posted earlier here. So have the counterarguments, and because there's no new info, as far as I'm concerned the change requests are still in effect. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:37:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:37:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232137.k0NLb3tV023081@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-23 16:36 EST ------- Do you have numbers about the importance of the toolkit? For me, the used toolkit is very important and I am a user. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:38:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:38:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232138.k0NLcqw3023446@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 16:38 EST ------- > Yes, no. Ok, so it is secure enough. You need to add the user to a certain group or to sudoers to allow? > -usermode introduces additional, non-trivial dependencies and is not needed for core functionality. Therefore, it must be in a separate package. Yes, I strongly agree with you here. > Every supported environment (FC-4+) has an rpm version >= 4.3, so the versioning does not make sense. Ok, but you still should add "Requires: rpm-python". > I heard no technical reasons for that and because I like '-gtk' more, I am not going to change that. The "technical reason" is the "name" of the gui executable "smart --gui" which maps to "smart-gui" better than to "smart-gtk". Smart does not advertise a "gtk mode" but a "gui mode". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 21:50:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:50:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232150.k0NLogmf025761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 16:50 EST ------- You don't have to bring the toolkit to the package name even though you think it is important to the user. It is important for me too as a user, but I don't read that information from package names but from their requires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Mon Jan 23 22:06:51 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:06:51 +0100 Subject: Some questions Message-ID: <1138054011.2897.26.camel@bureau.maison> Hi all, i'm working packaging freehdl (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ) because it is required with the qucs new version. I obtain this with rpmlint : E: freehdl wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gvhdl "/usr/local/bin/perl" so i need to change /usr/local/bin/perl to /usr/bin/perl with sed but i don't know how to do that. Someone could help me ? and with the devel package i obtained this : W: freehdl-devel no-documentation W: freehdl-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so libieee.so.0.0.0 I understand the first warning and i think it doesn't matter, no ? But i can't understand the second one. Someone could help me ? Thanks Eric From dominik at greysector.net Mon Jan 23 22:31:30 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:31:30 +0100 Subject: iscan license question Message-ID: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Hi! Can iscan parts covered by this license http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/license/EAPL_e.html be included in Fedora Extras? The rest of iscan is covered either by GPL or LGPL. Here's an extract from README: [...] "Image Scan! for Linux" contains the following parts: iscan the program you use to scan your images libsane-epkowa an improved driver for EPSON scanners libesmod a proprietary module used by iscan libesint* proprietary module used by libsane-epkowa esfw*.bin proprietary data used by libesint* The latter modules are provided (in object code form only) under the terms of the license agreement provided in `non-free/EAPL.en.txt'. The modules are linked against libraries from the `glibc' package which is covered by the GNU Lesser General Public License. The `iscan' program is covered by the GNU General Public License with a special exception that allows linking with the `libesmod' module. The libsane-epkowa driver is released under the same conditions as the SANE backends, that is under the GNU General Public License with a special exception that allows linking a SANE library with other files to produce an executable. The files non-free/esfw41.bin and non-free/esfw52.bin are distributed under the terms spelled out in the non-free/LICENSE.EPSON.en.txt file. Unless explicitly noted otherwise in the file itself, all other files in the non-free/ directory are copyright SEIKO EPSON Corporation and distributed under the terms of the EPSON AVASYS Public License (see non-free/EAPL.en.txt). [...] iscan is available for download here: http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/ Regards, R. -- RPM repository for Fedora Core http://rpm.greysector.net/ mpg321, xmp, faad2, lame, mad, *mplayer*, rdesktop, tin, xvid, mks, mutt "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 22:36:08 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:36:08 -0600 Subject: iscan license question In-Reply-To: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:31 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Hi! > > Can iscan parts covered by this license > http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/license/EAPL_e.html > be included in Fedora Extras? Yes, as long as you have source code for all of the bits. Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause. ~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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 22:35:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:35:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232235.k0NMZBOO002543@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-23 17:35 EST ------- If you want to do it in %install, this should work after the files have been installed: sed -i "s|/usr/local/bin/perl|%{__perl}|" $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/gvhdl -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 22:36:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:36:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232236.k0NMaujR002868@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 17:36 EST ------- > You need to add the user to a certain group or to sudoers to allow? I just looked the source. The applet executes "sudo -i $prog" there. So it is up to the user to allow execution of smart-update in sudoers. Although this might be a bit confusing for total newbies who don't know anything about sudo and who have used to using apps which ask for root password, this is actually the best solution to do this because this method is the most flexible one. The requirement for rpm-python seems to be there already (sorry if it was there all a long :)). I have only one request: change smart-gtk to smart-gui and I'll say let's approve. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dominik at greysector.net Mon Jan 23 22:48:26 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:48:26 +0100 Subject: iscan license question In-Reply-To: <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> On Monday, 23 January 2006 at 23:36, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:31 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Can iscan parts covered by this license > > http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/license/EAPL_e.html > > be included in Fedora Extras? > > Yes, as long as you have source code for all of the bits. That'll be a 'no' then, as they are all binary. > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause. Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including only the binary parts. Regards, R. -- RPM repository for Fedora Core http://rpm.greysector.net/ mpg321, xmp, faad2, lame, mad, *mplayer*, rdesktop, tin, xvid, mks, mutt "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 22:54:24 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:54:24 -0600 Subject: iscan license question In-Reply-To: <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <1138056865.2583.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:48 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Monday, 23 January 2006 at 23:36, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:31 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Can iscan parts covered by this license > > > http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/license/EAPL_e.html > > > be included in Fedora Extras? > > > > Yes, as long as you have source code for all of the bits. > > That'll be a 'no' then, as they are all binary. > > > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause. > > Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including only > the binary parts. That seems like the best plan of action. The rule of thumb (and I need to update the documentation to make this clear) is that Fedora Extras doesn't include anything without source code (unless it is one of the stated exceptions, firmware, game levels, etc...). ~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 bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 23 22:59:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:59:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232259.k0NMxnHI007745@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-23 17:59 EST ------- There are both names out there in the repo, -gui and -gtk. There seems to be a "policy" that frontends are usually named as -gui when libraries are named as -gtk. There are some frontends which are named as -gtk though, but those seem to have their executable also named like that. All (or at least majority of) graphical frontend packages seem to be named as -gui. I'd like to follow that "policy" here. Especially when the gui is launched with the command "smart --gui". (I know the interface dir is named as "gtk" but I think it would be more consistent to follow the visible side of it.) Just wanted to try to convince you more and explain why we others request the name change. Other than this, I'd say the spec is ok. Do others still want to bring smart-usermode to the main package? I really think that it is perfect like it is now because smart-usermode will be installed with the graphical packages automatically as dependencies. And we don't want to add unnecessary deps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 23:29:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:29:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232329.k0NNTTHr013464@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 orion at cora.nwra.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |orion at cora.nwra.com ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-23 18:29 EST ------- How are we doing with this? I see there is a 1.0.1 and even a 1.0.2a as well... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 23 23:38:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:38:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601232338.k0NNcN8I015059@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-23 18:38 EST ------- Actually I don't think this is a problem. On my system at least, perl gets detected properly in /usr/bin/perl. My gvhdl reflects this correctly. Do you happen to have an installation of perl in /usr/local/bin/perl? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dominik at greysector.net Mon Jan 23 23:44:14 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:44:14 +0100 Subject: iscan license question In-Reply-To: <1138056865.2583.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138056865.2583.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060123234414.GA22595@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> On Monday, 23 January 2006 at 23:54, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:48 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > On Monday, 23 January 2006 at 23:36, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:31 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > Can iscan parts covered by this license > > > > http://www.avasys.jp/english/linux_e/license/EAPL_e.html > > > > be included in Fedora Extras? > > > > > > Yes, as long as you have source code for all of the bits. > > > > That'll be a 'no' then, as they are all binary. > > > > > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause. > > > > Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including only > > the binary parts. > > That seems like the best plan of action. Would be, if iscan could be packaged that way. Unfortunately, it still requires a non-free, binary-only library libesmod.so.1. So, is it OK to package that library even if we don't have its source? I've heard from a reasonably reliable source that iscan is included in Fedora Directory Server. ;) R. -- RPM repository for Fedora Core http://rpm.greysector.net/ mpg321, xmp, faad2, lame, mad, *mplayer*, rdesktop, tin, xvid, mks, mutt "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Jan 23 23:52:22 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:52:22 -0600 Subject: Some questions In-Reply-To: <1138054011.2897.26.camel@bureau.maison> (Eric Tanguy's message of "Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:06:51 +0100") References: <1138054011.2897.26.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: >>>>> "ET" == Eric Tanguy writes: ET> so i need to change /usr/local/bin/perl to /usr/bin/perl with sed ET> but i don't know how to do that. Someone could help me ? Many packages just use Perl: perl -pi -e 's|#!/usr/local/bin/perl|#!/usr/bin/perl|' $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/gvhdl ET> W: freehdl-devel no-documentation I believe it's acceptable for -devel packages to lack documentation, although if your package has documentation intended for developers then I suppose it would be better to put it in the -devel package. ET> W: freehdl-devel dangling-relative-symlink ET> /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so libieee.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so is a symlink to libieee.so.0.0.0 but that does not exist. (Run rpmlint -i for more descrptive errors.) - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 00:26:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:26:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601240026.k0O0Qkvi023500@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-23 19:26 EST ------- Hi Orion (and everyone else interested in MPI), heres what I think ought to happen in approximate order: 1) upgrade this package to the latest upstream (easy!) 2) setup package to work with /usr/sbin/alternatives a) make this package work with it b) make the in-Core LAM work with it c) make the in-submission MPICH2 work with it (bug #171993) and, also, I'd like to request that - LAM be removed from Core, and/or - OpenMPI replace LAM within Core since the LAM developers have very publicly announced that LAM is in maintenance-only mode and have thrown their full weight behind OpenMPI: http://www.lam-mpi.org/ Tom ("Spot") has informally volunteered to help with the in-Core bits but I think we need to make some progress here first before pressuring (or is it begging?) the Core folks to help improve the MPI situation. :-) So, I'll try to get 1 and 2a done in a week or so... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 03:49:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:49:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601240349.k0O3nnQV029028@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From rolandd at cisco.com 2006-01-23 22:49 EST ------- Is it possible to build InfiniBand support for Open MPI, possibly in a separate package? The only thing Open MPI needs to build against for this is libibverbs-devel, which is packaged (by me) for Fedora Extras. This would be really useful, because it would mean that users could run MPI apps on IB entirely with standard binaries, without having to rebuild anything on Fedora. To build against the libibverbs I just build for Fedora will require the latest Open MPI tree -- it requires the change described in the 1.0.2 changelog as: - Update to match newest OpenIB user-level library API. Thanks to Roland Dreier for submitting this patch. I can provide more info if required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 04:17:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:17:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601240417.k0O4HdEG002219@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-23 23:17 EST ------- Hi Roland, thanks for pointing that out. Since libibverbs is in Extras, it should certainly be used! So, lets add it to the TO-DO list 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 wtogami at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 04:22:14 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:22:14 +0900 Subject: %{?dist} and changelog Message-ID: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/devel/libevent/libevent.spec?root=extras&rev=1.2 Hi folks, This is just a reminder to please do not include the %{?dist} suffix in the version field within a package %changelog like in this example package. It is misleading when the package is built in the future on newer distributions. The release number(s) prior to the dist tag should be sufficient within your %changelog. Thank you, Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 24 04:24:20 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:24:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060124042420.DCD3A80EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 6 ldns-1.0.0-7.fc3 mlmmj-1.2.11-1.fc3 perl-Pod-Simple-3.04-1.fc3 plague-0.4.3-5.fc3 pybliographer-1.2.8-1.fc3 testdisk-6.2-3.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 Tue Jan 24 04:24:26 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:24:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060124042426.6671A80EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 12 fetchlog-1.0-2.fc4 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.8-1.fc4 libibverbs-1.0-0.3.rc5.fc4 libmthca-1.0-0.3.rc5.fc4 mlmmj-1.2.11-1.fc4 moodss-21.0-1.fc4 perl-HTTP-Server-Simple-0.17-1.fc4 perl-Pod-Simple-3.04-1.fc4 plague-0.4.3-5.fc4 pybliographer-1.2.8-1.fc4 scim-anthy-0.8.0-2.fc4 testdisk-6.2-3.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 Jan 24 04:24:39 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:24:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060124042439.7394880EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 14 azureus-2.3.0.6-17.fc5 digikam-0.8.0-16.fc5 digikam-0.8.1-1.fc5 enigma-0.92-2.fc5 gaim-meanwhile-1.2.8-1.fc5 libibverbs-1.0-0.3.rc5.fc5 libmthca-1.0-0.3.rc5.fc5 mlmmj-1.2.11-1.fc5 perl-HTTP-Server-Simple-0.17-1.fc5 perl-Pod-Simple-3.04-1.fc5 plague-0.4.3-5.fc5 pybliographer-1.2.8-1.fc5 testdisk-6.2-3.fc5 xchat-gnome-0.9-2.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 Jan 24 05:32:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:32:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601240532.k0O5Wtwu015207@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-24 00:32 EST ------- You are right. I had a symlink /usr/local/bin/perl pointing /usr/bin/perl. I delete it and now i don't have this error. So this package needs a formal review. 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 Tue Jan 24 05:34:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:34:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601240534.k0O5YPUq015435@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-24 00:34 EST ------- 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 Tue Jan 24 05:44:54 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 06:44:54 +0100 Subject: %{?dist} and changelog In-Reply-To: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> References: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1138081494.5294.39.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:22 +0900, Warren Togami wrote: > http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/devel/libevent/libevent.spec?root=extras&rev=1.2 > > Hi folks, > > This is just a reminder to please do not include the %{?dist} suffix in > the version field within a package %changelog like in this example > package. How do you want us to avoid it in cases, where you have to branch releases/"walk side ways" release-wise? The usual work-around would be to append a suffix to end of the release tag, e.g. xxx-3-4%{dist}.1 (cf. below). > It is misleading when the package is built in the future on > newer distributions. The release number(s) prior to the dist tag should > be sufficient within your %changelog. Sorry, but this doesn't apply. Example: Given a package with a long history: FC3: 1-1.fc3 -> 1-2.fc3 FC4: -> 1-2.fc4 FC5: -> 1-2.fc5 Now modular was introduced to FC5, causing a cascade of rebuilds: FC5: -> 1-3.fc5 -> 1-5.fc5 -> 1-6.fc5 At this point, a packaging bug was discovered, only applying to FC < 5. The maintainer chose to "fork" for FC < 5 i.e. to use 1-2%{dist}.1, because 1.3%{dist} already had been used on "HEAD" (FC5): FC3: 1-2.fc2.1 FC4: 1-2.fc4.1 How to handle this case in %changelog? Ralf From wtogami at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 06:52:45 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:52:45 +0900 Subject: %{?dist} and changelog In-Reply-To: <1138081494.5294.39.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> <1138081494.5294.39.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <43D5CEBD.7020802@redhat.com> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:22 +0900, Warren Togami wrote: >> http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/devel/libevent/libevent.spec?root=extras&rev=1.2 >> >> Hi folks, >> >> This is just a reminder to please do not include the %{?dist} suffix in >> the version field within a package %changelog like in this example >> package. > > How do you want us to avoid it in cases, where you have to branch > releases/"walk side ways" release-wise? > Hard code it in the %changelog. > The usual work-around would be to append a suffix to end of the release > tag, e.g. xxx-3-4%{dist}.1 (cf. below). > >> It is misleading when the package is built in the future on >> newer distributions. The release number(s) prior to the dist tag should >> be sufficient within your %changelog. > > Sorry, but this doesn't apply. > > Example: Given a package with a long history: > > FC3: 1-1.fc3 > -> 1-2.fc3 > FC4: -> 1-2.fc4 > FC5: -> 1-2.fc5 > > Now modular was introduced to FC5, causing a cascade of rebuilds: > FC5: -> 1-3.fc5 > -> 1-5.fc5 > -> 1-6.fc5 > > At this point, a packaging bug was discovered, only applying to FC < 5. > The maintainer chose to "fork" for FC < 5 i.e. to use 1-2%{dist}.1, > because 1.3%{dist} already had been used on "HEAD" (FC5): > FC3: 1-2.fc2.1 > FC4: 1-2.fc4.1 > > How to handle this case in %changelog? Simply hard-code dist in the changelog if you have to branch sideways and diverge from the other distros. I personally don't include the dist in changelogs at all in any packages when it is exactly identical between distros, but if they differ then it is good to differentiate it. Hard coding is the only clean and future proof way. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 24 07:32:44 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:32:44 +0100 Subject: %{?dist} and changelog In-Reply-To: <43D5CEBD.7020802@redhat.com> References: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> <1138081494.5294.39.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43D5CEBD.7020802@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1138087965.5294.56.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 15:52 +0900, Warren Togami wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:22 +0900, Warren Togami wrote: > >> http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/devel/libevent/libevent.spec?root=extras&rev=1.2 > >> > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> This is just a reminder to please do not include the %{?dist} suffix in > >> the version field within a package %changelog like in this example > >> package. > > > > How do you want us to avoid it in cases, where you have to branch > > releases/"walk side ways" release-wise? > Simply hard-code dist in the changelog if you have to branch sideways > and diverge from the other distros. I personally don't include the dist > in changelogs at all in any packages when it is exactly identical > between distros, but if they differ then it is good to differentiate it. This renders maintaining packages complicated. > Hard coding is the only clean and future proof way. My conclusion is quite the opposite to what you say: Always encode %{dist} into changelogs is the only clean way. Ralf From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 10:22:42 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:22:42 +0000 Subject: Mono apps in extras Message-ID: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I'm about to put in a review request for monodoc, gtksourceview-sharp and an update of mysql-connector-net. The source package for monodevelop seems broken, so I'll wait to see what happens there upstream (I'm about to report it on the monodevelop list) Before I do that though, could someone in the know say what happened at the FE meeting last night over allowing mono apps into FE? I don't want to waste my time packaging for FE with mono if they're not allowed in. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Jan 24 10:43:16 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:43:16 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Hi! Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 10:22 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: >[...] > Before I do that though, could someone in the know say what happened at > the FE meeting last night There was no meeting yesterday -- they're on each Thursday at 18:00 UTC #fedora-extras on freenode. I only set a deadline for yesterday to allow people to hand in a "fedora-extras should forbid mono packages in extras" proposal. Nothing showed up so there is nothing to discuss for FESCo afaics (the FESCo members were all quiet, too). So it seems the old rule applies: If it's allowed in Core it's also fine for Extras. > over allowing mono apps into FE? I don't want > to waste my time packaging for FE with mono if they're not allowed in. I'm sure this mailinglist-thread will make waves again. Maybe something comes out of it this time or maybe there will be a longish discussion in the next FESCo meeting. Wait till the meeting is over. CU thl From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 10:48:19 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:48:19 +0000 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1138099699.7477.49.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > There was no meeting yesterday -- they're on each Thursday at 18:00 UTC > #fedora-extras on freenode. How far infront / behind is UTC to Greenwich Mean Time? I'd quite like to be at that meeting (I sign in under the name Nodoid) TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 24 11:03:45 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:03:45 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 11:43 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi! > > Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 10:22 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > >[...] > I only set a deadline for yesterday to allow people to hand in a > "fedora-extras should forbid mono packages in extras" proposal. Nothing > showed up so there is nothing to discuss for FESCo afaics (the FESCo > members were all quiet, too). > > So it seems the old rule applies: If it's allowed in Core it's also fine > for Extras. Grumble, once more: According to RH until recently, mono/C#/.net are subject to potential patent claims. Some weeks ago, RH pushed Mono etc. in FC - I repeatedly had asked to explain (Last time on a PM to YOU in person, yesterday), to elaborate what made RH to consider their former claim to be invalid. No response, so far. > > over allowing mono apps into FE? I don't want > > to waste my time packaging for FE with mono if they're not allowed in. As FE packager, you have signed the CLA. As part of such you have signed a paragraph on potential patent infringements. It's up to you to draw conclusions of your own. Mine is: I will not approve any package which uses Mono/C#/.NET, because I don't know what about the legal situation has changed. I will continue to consider all such works to be too risky for me to be wanting to be involved into packing them and to avoid users to be exposed to legal risks. I am willing to reconsider this opinion, should some RH or FESCO spokesperson be able to elaborate the legal situation of Mono etc. Ralf From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 24 11:07:41 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:37:41 +0330 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138099699.7477.49.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138099699.7477.49.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1138100861.3019.6.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 10:48 +0000, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > How far infront / behind is UTC to Greenwich Mean Time? I'd quite like > to be at that meeting (I sign in under the name Nodoid) About 33 seconds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second roozbeh From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 11:15:55 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:15:55 +0000 Subject: Multiple locales in a spec file Message-ID: <1138101355.7477.52.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, Is there a quick and easy way that I can put into a spec file which imports all of the languages supported by a package? Monodevelop supports something like 10 languages = 10 locale directories + files = bigger spec file than I suspect is required. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at city-fan.org Tue Jan 24 11:18:51 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:18:51 +0000 Subject: Multiple locales in a spec file In-Reply-To: <1138101355.7477.52.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138101355.7477.52.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43D60D1B.5030104@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Is there a quick and easy way that I can put into a spec file which > imports all of the languages supported by a package? Monodevelop > supports something like 10 languages = 10 locale directories + files = > bigger spec file than I suspect is required. Is this something other than would be handled by %{find_lang}? Paul. From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Jan 24 11:30:04 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:30:04 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 12:03 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 11:43 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 10:22 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > > >[...] > > > I only set a deadline for yesterday to allow people to hand in a > > "fedora-extras should forbid mono packages in extras" proposal. Nothing > > showed up so there is nothing to discuss for FESCo afaics (the FESCo > > members were all quiet, too). > > > > So it seems the old rule applies: If it's allowed in Core it's also fine > > for Extras. > Grumble, once more: > > According to RH until recently, mono/C#/.net are subject to potential > patent claims. Yes, until recently. > Some weeks ago, RH pushed Mono etc. in FC - I repeatedly had asked to > explain (Last time on a PM to YOU in person, yesterday), to elaborate > what made RH to consider their former claim to be invalid. > > No response, so far. "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." I (as most other people outside of the Fedora Foundation or Red Hat) don't know more details. > > > over allowing mono apps into FE? I don't want > > > to waste my time packaging for FE with mono if they're not allowed in. > > As FE packager, you have signed the CLA. As part of such you have signed > a paragraph on potential patent infringements. It's up to you to draw > conclusions of your own. > > Mine is: I will not approve any package which uses Mono/C#/.NET, because > I don't know what about the legal situation has changed. I will continue > to consider all such works to be too risky for me to be wanting to be > involved into packing them and to avoid users to be exposed to legal > risks. Okay. Then don't package apps based on Mono/C#/.NET. > I am willing to reconsider this opinion, should some RH or FESCO > spokesperson be able to elaborate the legal situation of Mono etc. I can't give more details because I don't know more. But I'm willing to trust Red Hat here -- they allowed it for Core and I see no reason why we should forbid it in Extras. That would look quite odd anyway... CU thl From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 11:32:54 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:32:54 +0000 Subject: Multiple locales in a spec file In-Reply-To: <43D60D1B.5030104@city-fan.org> References: <1138101355.7477.52.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <43D60D1B.5030104@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1138102374.7477.55.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > Is there a quick and easy way that I can put into a spec file which > > imports all of the languages supported by a package? Monodevelop > > supports something like 10 languages = 10 locale directories + files = > > bigger spec file than I suspect is required. > > Is this something other than would be handled by %{find_lang}? Must have missed that. Can't seem to find any docs on the rpm.org site about it though. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 24 11:50:58 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:50:58 +0100 (CET) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > So it seems the old rule applies: If it's allowed in Core it's also fine > for Extras. Now we're only waiting for RedHat to spill the beans as to why they suddely changed policy regarding Mono. Linus From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 24 11:56:07 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:56:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis (quoting Red Hat) wrote: > "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from > being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." I still read this like "cheez we just MUST have all this cool Mono stuff with Beagle and Galago and all, perhaps the patent issue is not so bad after all?" just put in fancier language. But really, it's the kind of thing I could have said myself, so I like it :-) Linus From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 24 12:03:44 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:03:44 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 12:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 12:03 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 11:43 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.01.2006, 10:22 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > > > >[...] > > > > > I only set a deadline for yesterday to allow people to hand in a > > > "fedora-extras should forbid mono packages in extras" proposal. Nothing > > > showed up so there is nothing to discuss for FESCo afaics (the FESCo > > > members were all quiet, too). > > > > > > So it seems the old rule applies: If it's allowed in Core it's also fine > > > for Extras. > > Grumble, once more: > > > > According to RH until recently, mono/C#/.net are subject to potential > > patent claims. > > Yes, until recently. > > > Some weeks ago, RH pushed Mono etc. in FC - I repeatedly had asked to > > explain (Last time on a PM to YOU in person, yesterday), to elaborate > > what made RH to consider their former claim to be invalid. > > > > No response, so far. > > "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from > being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." This doesn't answer my question. RH business considerations are irrelevant here. We are having a legal problem here, which we needs to be clarified to protect ourselves and FE's users. > I (as most other people outside of the Fedora Foundation or Red Hat) > don't know more details. Great, ... master piece of communication with RH ... ;) How about you asking your predecessor GDK, on behalf of FESCO? http://fedora.redhat.com/About/contact.html lists him as the FF's "legal inquiries" contact person. > > I am willing to reconsider this opinion, should some RH or FESCO > > spokesperson be able to elaborate the legal situation of Mono etc. > > I can't give more details because I don't know more. But I'm willing to > trust Red Hat here Well, RH and your fellow RH-employed FESCO members had been very verbosely rejecting any Mono-related request, because they claimed severe legal concerns. Now, this out of a sudden all their vocalize has become invalid without explanation? I hope you don't mind, if I cann't find such a rotating course to give much reason for trust. > -- they allowed it for Core and I see no reason why > we should forbid it in Extras. That would look quite odd anyway... There is a substantial difference: None of us has control over Core, but anybody being actively involved into FE, packaging packages for FE or using such packages could potentially be subject to legal action. Ralf From Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 24 12:54:02 2006 From: Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric TANGUY) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:54:02 +0100 (CET) Subject: Help with compilers Message-ID: <47370.172.20.10.61.1138107242.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> I'm trying to package freehdl ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ). My first idea was to split it in 2 packages : freehdl and freehdl-devel but it seems to be a bad idea because the 2 packages are needed to make freehdl to work. Someone could explain me what to do whith this kind of package ? Thanks Eric From rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Jan 24 13:51:03 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:51:03 -0600 Subject: Help with compilers References: <47370.172.20.10.61.1138107242.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Message-ID: Eric TANGUY wrote: > I'm trying to package freehdl ( > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ). > My first idea was to split it in 2 packages : freehdl and freehdl-devel > but it seems to be a bad idea because the 2 packages are needed to make > freehdl to work. > Someone could explain me what to do whith this kind of package ? Simple. If both bits are needed to make it work, then there's not much point in splitting them: make a single monolithic freehdl. -- Rex From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 14:10:15 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:10:15 +0000 Subject: Using %{find-lang} question Message-ID: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I mostly have a number of Mono packages ready for FE submission on Friday and the final one has a pile of language files. Paul Howarth says I can find the languages using %{find-lang} but the available docs on it are somewhat short. I have in my %install the line %{find-lang} %{name}-%{version} but this just throws back with fg - no job control. How do I use find-lang and then what needs to be put in the %files area? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at city-fan.org Tue Jan 24 14:16:13 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:16:13 +0000 Subject: Using %{find-lang} question In-Reply-To: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43D636AD.5090800@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I mostly have a number of Mono packages ready for FE submission on > Friday and the final one has a pile of language files. > > Paul Howarth says I can find the languages using %{find-lang} but the > available docs on it are somewhat short. > > I have in my %install the line > > %{find-lang} %{name}-%{version} > > but this just throws back with fg - no job control. Use: %{find_lang} %{name} Note it's find_lang, not find-lang. > How do I use find-lang and then what needs to be put in the %files area? Just replace the %files line with: %files -f %{name}.lang Paul. From mitr at volny.cz Tue Jan 24 14:18:36 2006 From: mitr at volny.cz (Miloslav Trmac) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:18:36 +0100 Subject: Using %{find-lang} question In-Reply-To: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <43D6373C.9060601@volny.cz> Hello, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > I have in my %install the line > > %{find-lang} %{name}-%{version} That should be find_lang (underscore, not minus). The argument is the basename of the .mo files. > How do I use find-lang and then what needs to be put in the %files area? %files -f %{name}-%{version}.lang ... and the rest as usual, without the *.mo files ... Mirek From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 24 14:19:55 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:19:55 +0100 Subject: Using %{find-lang} question In-Reply-To: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1138112396.16296.17.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 14:10 +0000, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I mostly have a number of Mono packages ready for FE submission on > Friday and the final one has a pile of language files. > > Paul Howarth says I can find the languages using %{find-lang} but the > available docs on it are somewhat short. find_lang is just a macro, you to invoke a script: # rpm -q --showrc | grep find_lang -14: find_lang /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/find-lang.sh %{buildroot} > I have in my %install the line > > %{find-lang} %{name}-%{version} > > but this just throws back with fg - no job control. > > How do I use find-lang and then what needs to be put in the %files area? Check the source: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/find-lang.sh It's a rather trivial wrapper around find. Ralf From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Jan 24 14:22:32 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:22:32 +0000 Subject: Using %{find-lang} question In-Reply-To: <43D636AD.5090800@city-fan.org> References: <1138111815.7477.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <43D636AD.5090800@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1138112553.7477.81.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > Use: > > %{find_lang} %{name} > > Note it's find_lang, not find-lang. Ah. Gotcha. That throws up the following No translations found for monodevelop in /var/tmp/monodevelop-0.9-1-root-paul I'd have thought that find_lang would search through the build directory rather than %{buildroot} > > How do I use find-lang and then what needs to be put in the %files area? > > Just replace the %files line with: > > %files -f %{name}.lang Thanks. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Tue Jan 24 14:31:04 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 06:31:04 -0800 Subject: Repoview version on Extras (repoview also now on Rawhide!) Message-ID: A nice new feature, rawhide now has repoview: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/repodata/ However, I noticed that the Rawhide repoview is using the new 0.5 version of repoview but the extras is still using 0.4: http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/ Could repoview be upgraded to 0.5 on Extras too? It has some nice new features like links to SRPMS. Bugzilla ticket: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/178795 Thanks, Alex From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 16:08:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:08:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: adplug-xmms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241608.k0OG8EJe008378@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178360 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-24 11:08 EST ------- Fixed it: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug-1.1-2.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 Tue Jan 24 16:09:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:09:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241609.k0OG9cMI009036@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-24 11:09 EST ------- New package: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay-1.4-2.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 triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 24 16:26:08 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:26:08 +0100 (CET) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > There is a substantial difference: None of us has control over Core, but > anybody being actively involved into FE, packaging packages for FE or > using such packages could potentially be subject to legal action. Anyone could *perhaps* commit an offense in the United States and their friends in North America. I assume you are Germany-based Ralf, so software patents, as you know, were turned down by the European parliament. That doesn't mean you might do something in the States that is not so good with them, but then they have to get you first ... better cancel all trips to US from the moment I commit some patent infringement. (I might have already done that when I approved WINE, life sucks.) I really think they will go after the Fedora foundation before they go after you. Linus From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jan 24 16:55:46 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:55:46 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138121746.16296.53.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 17:26 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > There is a substantial difference: None of us has control over Core, but > > anybody being actively involved into FE, packaging packages for FE or > > using such packages could potentially be subject to legal action. > > Anyone could *perhaps* commit an offense in the United States and their > friends in North America. I assume you are Germany-based Ralf, Yes, I am. > so software > patents, as you know, were turned down by the European parliament. I know, but ... you and I have signed a bilateral contract called CLA (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses/CLA) with a US-based enterprise called RH. This could be interpreted as "contributions are subject to US law and US courts." Part of this contract is this paragraph: ... 2. Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project: [...] (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 3) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer your Contribution and derivative works thereof, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by you that are necessarily infringed by your Contribution alone or by combination of your Contribution with the work to which you submitted the Contribution. ... Now, think about this legalize. > That > doesn't mean you might do something in the States that is not so good with > them, but then they have to get you first ... better cancel all trips to > US from the moment I commit some patent infringement. That's what scares me - Also, can you exclude that a US based entity won't try to legally threaten you ("Pay USD1000 or we will sue you in front of a US court)? AFAIK, this already had happened on other occasions. > (I might have > already done that when I approved WINE, life sucks.) Guess why I didn't ;) > I really think they will go after the Fedora foundation before they go > after you. I can only hope it will happen this way -- should it happen. I'd expect "big ones" will go after the "big ones", but the "twilight law-firm" will try to go after the weakest link - In first place, this would be the user, in second place it would be the maintainer. Ralf From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 24 16:45:43 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:15:43 +0330 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138121143.3019.27.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 17:26 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > There is a substantial difference: None of us has control over Core, but > > anybody being actively involved into FE, packaging packages for FE or > > using such packages could potentially be subject to legal action. > > Anyone could *perhaps* commit an offense in the United States and their > friends in North America. I assume you are Germany-based Ralf, so software > patents, as you know, were turned down by the European parliament. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_the_European_Patent_Convention#Enforceability_before_national_courts To quote a part: "In Germany in the case Logikverifikation (December 13, 1999), the German Federal Court (German: Bundesgerichtshof or BGH) ruled on a case involving a European patent claiming a computer-implemented invention, namely a "method for hierarchical logic verification of highly-integrated circuits". Going against the run of previous case law, it overruled the German Federal Patent Court (German: Bundespatentgericht or BPatG), and came to the conclusion that the claimed subject-matter did properly meet the 'technical' requirement, was not excluded from patentability and therefore the patent should be allowed." roozbeh From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 17:17:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:17:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241717.k0OHHMB8025630@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 rpm at timj.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |178821 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-01-24 12:17 EST ------- Build fails due to php-pear missing dep on php (bug #178821) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 17:18:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:18:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241718.k0OHIEDV026066@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-24 12:18 EST ------- Source should be http://dl.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From gdk at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 18:27:03 2006 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:27:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from > > being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > This doesn't answer my question. RH business considerations are > irrelevant here. We are having a legal problem here, which we needs to > be clarified to protect ourselves and FE's users. > > I (as most other people outside of the Fedora Foundation or Red Hat) > > don't know more details. > Great, ... master piece of communication with RH ... ;) > > How about you asking your predecessor GDK, on behalf of FESCO? > > http://fedora.redhat.com/About/contact.html lists him as the FF's "legal > inquiries" contact person. That *was* my statement, directly from my blog. It's still my statement. "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." I don't like it. No one likes it, near as I can tell. It is what it is. If and when I can say more, I assure you that I will. --g --------------------------------------------------------------- Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Foundation || fedoraproject.org Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors --------------------------------------------------------------- From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 24 18:50:26 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:50:26 +0100 (CET) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138121746.16296.53.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138121746.16296.53.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> doesn't mean you might do something in the States that is not so good with >> them, but then they have to get you first ... better cancel all trips to >> US from the moment I commit some patent infringement. > That's what scares me - Also, can you exclude that a US based entity > won't try to legally threaten you ("Pay USD1000 or we will sue you in > front of a US court)? Threaten yes. Execute legal actions, no. They can sue you in a US court of law of course, but that is highly unlikely since the outcome is so uncertain. The EU certainly won't expel you for doing something in the US that is not a crime in the EU. Hence, the trial would only mean economic loss, and hence, they won't sue. They will however sue Fedora foundation instead. However they could most certainly confiscate any property you might hold in the US if it was big enough to care about, such as shares in Red Hat (not unlikely for a FE contributor, though I don't have any). I guess I could live with not being able to travel to the US for such an awkward reason, it would be so bizarre... But this is all a matter of practicalities, not about right and wrong and how the agreements should be written, so we need to get it sorted out for sure. Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 18:46:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:46:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241846.k0OIkgJI016188@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-24 13:46 EST ------- Ooops I made a mistake because this kind of packages don't have to be split in package and package-devel. So i updated the files : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl-0.0.1-1.src.rpm But i have a lot of problems with rpmbuild : rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/freehdl-v2cc.debug E: freehdl statically-linked-binary /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/freehdl-v2cc.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so. 0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-std.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.so .0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-fire.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-kernel. so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-kernel.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-kernel.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen .so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-cdfggen.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.so .0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/free hdl/libieee.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.so .0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-vaul.so.0.0.0.debug My main problem is below with unstripped-binary-or-object I think the lines above are not important in this case. W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/kernel.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/FlexLexer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-ref.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-lexer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-creator-bas e.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-parser.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-mempool.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/cdfggen-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/tree-supp.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-kernel.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-list.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-util.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/std.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-types.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/freehdl/libieee.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire-types.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-kernel.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dfile.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dunit.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-pool.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dynarray.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-printer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-errors.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/freehdl-config W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.a W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire.h -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 24 18:59:53 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:29:53 +0330 Subject: RPM version comparison Message-ID: <1138129193.3019.39.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> I just finished writing a detailed explanation of RPM version comparison algorithm, in case you want to know (and remember) how it really works. I call this required knowledge for every packager: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Tools/RPM/Version_comparison Fell free to edit and improvise it, specially if you have good examples to add to the end. roozbeh From triad at df.lth.se Tue Jan 24 19:02:21 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:02:21 +0100 (CET) Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > If and when I can say more, I assure you that I will. Cool now you sound like a federal comission :-) That statement alone indeed confirms that it is a hot potato. In absence of statements we can happily start speculating which will in turn generate rumors. Here is my first RockingSpeculation(TM) which is certainly NotTrue(TM): RedHat has struck a deal of sorts with /insert big company name here/ that their lawyers shall go after Microsoft for all their patents they break in case Microsoft sue Red Hat or the Fedora foundation for any patent infringements. /big company/ could be for example Novell since they sort of make Mono, or could even be IBM. Both hold many patents dangerous to Microsoft. Linus From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 24 19:21:53 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:21:53 +0100 Subject: Help with compilers In-Reply-To: References: <47370.172.20.10.61.1138107242.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Message-ID: <1138130513.2901.2.camel@bureau.maison> Le mardi 24 janvier 2006 ? 07:51 -0600, Rex Dieter a ?crit : > Eric TANGUY wrote: > > > I'm trying to package freehdl ( > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ). > > My first idea was to split it in 2 packages : freehdl and freehdl-devel > > but it seems to be a bad idea because the 2 packages are needed to make > > freehdl to work. > > Someone could explain me what to do whith this kind of package ? > > Simple. If both bits are needed to make it work, then there's not much > point in splitting them: make a single monolithic freehdl. > > -- Rex > You are right so i tried to make a single package and modified the spec file to do this but now i have a lot of problem with rpmlint and unstripped-binary-or-object errors : W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/freehdl-v2cc.debug E: freehdl statically-linked-binary /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/freehdl-v2cc.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so. 0.0.0.debug W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so.0.0.0.debug E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf reehdl-std.so.0.0.0.debug W: freehdl unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.so .0.0.0.debug and so on Someone could help with this ? Thanks Eric From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 19:22:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:22:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241922.k0OJMNHC025382@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-24 14:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > W: freehdl no-soname /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.so.0.0.0.debug > E: freehdl shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libf > reehdl-vaul.so.0.0.0.debug > > My main problem is below with unstripped-binary-or-object > I think the lines above are not important in this case. You should not use ?%{_libdir}/*? in %files section, because final package will contain files from debug subpackage, which is just plain wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 19:28:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:28:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241928.k0OJScur026934@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-24 14:28 EST ------- Actually, the package is called adplug, not adplay. So the sourceforge project adplay does not exist, adplug does 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 rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Jan 24 19:37:43 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:37:43 -0600 Subject: Help with compilers In-Reply-To: <1138130513.2901.2.camel@bureau.maison> References: <47370.172.20.10.61.1138107242.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <1138130513.2901.2.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: Eric Tanguy wrote: > Le mardi 24 janvier 2006 ? 07:51 -0600, Rex Dieter a ?crit : >>Simple. If both bits are needed to make it work, then there's not much >>point in splitting them: make a single monolithic freehdl. > You are right so i tried to make a single package and modified the spec > file to do this but now i have a lot of problem with rpmlint and > unstripped-binary-or-object errors : > W: freehdl > unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/freehdl-v2cc.debug > E: freehdl In %files, don't use %{_libdir}/* because that will snarf %{_libdir}/debug which goes in %{name}-debuginfo -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 19:45:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:45:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241945.k0OJjrP4031808@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-24 14:45 EST ------- %{_libdir}/freehdl/ %{_libdir}/libfreehdl* should resolve your problem. BTW is there any reason why don't you use `--disable-dependency-tracking --disable-static' flags? This will speed up build process and remove static libraries. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 19:56:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:56:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601241956.k0OJuPoJ001939@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-24 14:56 EST ------- Well yeah the project is called adplug, and the package is called adplay. So: wget http://download.sourceforge.net/adplug/adplay-1.4.tar.gz works, thus I change the first name and it's fixed... I guess its the same for xmms-adplug (a related package) so I will fix that too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 20:13:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:13:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242013.k0OKDSGO005490@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From Jochen at herr-schmitt.de 2006-01-24 15:13 EST ------- Hello, it will be nice if anyone get his eyes to the corrected package in comment #22. Thank you for your patient. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 21:10:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:10:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242110.k0OLAPLH016357@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-24 16:10 EST ------- I'm sorry but i'm quite new in packaging. This is the first time i package such a soft and i know nothing about `--disable-dependency-tracking --disable-static'. What is it ? How you use it ? What are the advantages and the disadvantages of using or not using these flags ? 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 Tue Jan 24 21:15:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:15:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242115.k0OLFMQ8017434@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-24 16:15 EST ------- Eric, As Dawid said, --disable-dependancy-tracking speeds one-time builds --disable-static omits static libs Add these to %configure, like %configure \ --disable-dependancy-tracking \ --disable-static -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From wart at kobold.org Tue Jan 24 21:40:39 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:40:39 -0800 Subject: RPM version comparison In-Reply-To: <1138129193.3019.39.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138129193.3019.39.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <43D69ED7.9060606@kobold.org> Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I just finished writing a detailed explanation of RPM version comparison > algorithm, in case you want to know (and remember) how it really works. > I call this required knowledge for every packager: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Tools/RPM/Version_comparison > Page not found. It appears the following is the correct link: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Tools/RPM/VersionComparison --Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 24 21:41:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:41:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242141.k0OLfhr5023988@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-24 16:41 EST ------- Thanks all. New version : Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl-0.0.1-1.src.rpm rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/kernel.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/FlexLexer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-ref.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-lexer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-creator-base.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-parser.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-mempool.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/cdfggen-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/tree-supp.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-kernel.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-list.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dynarray.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-std.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-util.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/std.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-types.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire-types.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire-chunk.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-vaul.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dfile.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-dunit.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-pool.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-fire.so W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-printer.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/vaul-errors.h W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/freehdl-config W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire.h I think it's not relevant with this package. The new version works fine with the new version of qucs which now support also digital simulation!! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 22:04:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:04:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242204.k0OM4OEv027863@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-24 17:04 EST ------- New package: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplay-1.4-3.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 Tue Jan 24 22:04:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:04:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: adplug-xmms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242204.k0OM4feZ027909@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178360 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-24 17:04 EST ------- New package: Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug-1.1-3.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 Tue Jan 24 22:45:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242245.k0OMjnBC003695@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-24 17:45 EST ------- I've put a 1.0.1 version with a start on using alternatives here: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/openmpi-1.0.1-1.src.rpm Some notes and questions that have arisen: - Used %{version} in Source0 line - Removed Requires: gcc-gfortan. I'm sure many folks will use this without fortran. - Add Requires(post): /usr/sbin/alternatives. - Add post/preun scripts to install alternatives. Note that the alternatives for mpirun and mpiexec can't be used until lam is converted to use alternatives. - Removed %exclude %{_libdir}/debug, unnecessary - Made %sysconfdir stuff %config - Do we really need the .openmpi suffix on the following: /usr/bin/ompi_info.openmpi /usr/bin/orted.openmpi /usr/bin/orteprobe.openmpi /usr/bin/orterun.openmpi Is anyone other than openmpi going to provide these? I dropped the .openmpi suffix option and instead simply renamed the compiler wrappers and handled the mpirun/mpiexec links via alternatives. - Do we want to switch all of the mpi* commands as a unit, or individually. I've done the mpirun/mpiexec as a unit named "mpi" and the compiler wrappers individually here because I think I can imagine wanting different fortran compilers on different machines and I'm not sure we can split an alternatives unit between two sub-packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 24 23:28:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601242328.k0ONSkWg011562@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From dakingun at gmail.com 2006-01-24 18:28 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > - Removed Requires: gcc-gfortan. I'm sure many folks will use this without fortran. Most MPI implementations configures and build the fortran module by default, so I guess rpm will pull in the dependency anyway. > - Add Requires(post): /usr/sbin/alternatives. > - Add post/preun scripts to install alternatives. Note that the alternatives > for mpirun and mpiexec can't be used until lam is converted to use alternatives. I've been meaning to submit a patch for lam (in Core) to do this, but have been very busy lately; maybe the Redhat maintainer will be willing to get it going with a patch. > > /usr/bin/ompi_info.openmpi > /usr/bin/orted.openmpi > /usr/bin/orteprobe.openmpi > /usr/bin/orterun.openmpi > > Is anyone other than openmpi going to provide these? I don't think so. > > I dropped the .openmpi suffix option and instead simply renamed the compiler > wrappers and handled the mpirun/mpiexec links via alternatives. > > - Do we want to switch all of the mpi* commands as a unit, or individually. What do you mean by a unit here ? I believe what you have in the src.rpm above is okay, many applications built to use mpi specifically looks for this individual executables. Nice work. Deji PS: Why not just pass -includedir=%{_includedir}/%{name} and -libdir=%{_libdir}/%{name} to the configure flag instead of moving the files around. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 00:29:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:29:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176532] Review Request: TurboGears: Back-to-front web development in Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250029.k0P0T2ih021624@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: TurboGears: Back-to-front web development in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176532 ------- Additional Comments From sopwith at redhat.com 2006-01-24 19:29 EST ------- Hey, Sorry I can't review this package, but just want to thank you for starting to package it for Fedora - we're looking into using this to speed up Fedora infrastructure development. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 00:36:09 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:36:09 +0900 Subject: %{?dist} and changelog In-Reply-To: <1138087965.5294.56.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <43D5AB76.4000009@redhat.com> <1138081494.5294.39.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <43D5CEBD.7020802@redhat.com> <1138087965.5294.56.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <43D6C7F9.2010603@redhat.com> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> Hard coding is the only clean and future proof way. > My conclusion is quite the opposite to what you say: Always encode > %{dist} into changelogs is the only clean way. > It is a bad idea to use any macros in %changelog, especially ones that will change in the future. It makes no sense in the case of %{?dist} especially because when the package is rebuilt in a future dist, it shows "fc6" on very old revisions that didn't exist for FC6. That is misleading and wrong. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 25 00:37:34 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:37:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060125003734.F329880EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 13 digikam-0.8.1-1.fc4 fetchlog-1.0-2.fc4 fluxconf-0.9.9-1.fc4 git-1.1.4-1.fc4 gnome-sudoku-0.4.0-4.fc4 ipython-0.7.1-1.fc4 mock-0.4-4.fc4 mock-0.4-5.fc4 moomps-5.4-1.fc4 nagios-1.3-14.fc4 plague-0.4.3-6.fc4 rxvt-unicode-7.2-1.fc4 system-config-control-1.0-4.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 Wed Jan 25 00:37:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:37:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060125003722.CC6EE80EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 14 digikam-0.8.1-2.fc3 fetchlog-1.0-2.fc3 fluxconf-0.9.9-1.fc3 git-1.1.4-1.fc3 ipython-0.7.1-1.fc3 ldns-1.0.1-1.fc3 mock-0.4-4.fc3 mock-0.4-5.fc3 moodss-21.0-1.fc3 moomps-5.4-1.fc3 nagios-1.3-14.fc3 plague-0.4.3-6.fc3 rxvt-unicode-7.2-1.fc3 scim-anthy-0.8.0-2.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 Wed Jan 25 00:38:01 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:38:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060125003801.5835E80EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 31 allegro-4.2.0-4 altermime-0.3.6-1.fc5 bbkeys-0.9.0-2.fc5 blackbox-0.70.1-2.fc5 blender-2.40-2.fc5 camE-1.9-4.fc5 csmash-0.6.6-10.fc5 fetchlog-1.0-2.fc5 fluxconf-0.9.9-1.fc5 giblib-1.2.4-4.fc5 git-1.1.4-1.fc5 gnumeric-1.6.1-3 gstreamer-python-0.10.2-1.fc5 gstreamer08-python-0.8.3-1.fc5 ipython-0.7.1-1.fc5 ldns-1.0.1-1.fc5 lirc-0.8.0-2.fc5 mock-0.4-4.fc5 mock-0.4-5.fc5 moodss-21.0-1.fc5 moomps-5.4-1.fc5 nagios-1.3-14.fc5 perl-MailTools-1.73-1.fc5 perl-Module-Signature-0.52-1.fc5 plague-0.4.3-6.fc5 rxvt-unicode-7.2-1.fc5 system-config-control-1.0-4.fc5 tclhttpd-3.5.1-7.fc5 util-vserver-0.30.210-1.fc5 vpnc-0.3.3-5 wine-0.9.6-1.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 Wed Jan 25 01:11:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:11:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250111.k0P1BAsF027350@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-24 20:11 EST ------- Sorry, I should have emphasized that the Source should be http://dl.sourceforge.net/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 03:11:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:11:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250311.k0P3BNA3009979@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-24 22:11 EST ------- I'm still trying to debug this and get amavisd-new running. Looking a bit further into my db error, I noticed: ["DBI:SQLite:dbname=$MYHOME/sql/mail_prefs.sqlite", '', ''] ); Howeverm there is no 'sql' directory included with amavisd-new in the rpm. Perhaps either the sqlite depedancy needs to be dropped, or this file needs to be included? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 03:13:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:13:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250313.k0P3D7P3010325@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-24 22:12 EST ------- also, there is a note saying: #NOTE: create directories $MYHOME/tmp, $MYHOME/var, $MYHOME/db manually However, $MYHOME/var is not created by the 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 Wed Jan 25 03:22:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:22:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167354] Review Request: amavisd-new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250322.k0P3MQXq012145@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: amavisd-new https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167354 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-24 22:22 EST ------- I finally found the reason for my failure, which is the following line: $enable_db = 1 checking the build shipped config file shows: [root at cdc amavisd]# grep enable_db /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf* /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf:$enable_db = 1; # enable use of BerkeleyDB/libdb (SNMP and nanny) /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf:$enable_global_cache = 1; # enable use of libdb-based cache if $enable_db=1 /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf-default:# $enable_db = 0; /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf-sample:$enable_db = 1; # enable use of BerkeleyDB/libdb (SNMP and nanny) /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/amavisd-new-2.3.3/amavisd.conf-sample:$enable_global_cache = 1; # enable use of libdb-based cache if $enable_db=1 So I believe it did ship with $enable_db=1 So either this functionality is broken, or more likely, something else needs to happen that I have not yet done, but which was already dont on the server of the rpm builder. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 04:02:46 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:02:46 +0100 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138102204.21471.77.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138104224.5294.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138161767.16296.77.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:27 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > > "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from > > > being included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > > > This doesn't answer my question. RH business considerations are > > irrelevant here. We are having a legal problem here, which we needs to > > be clarified to protect ourselves and FE's users. > > > > I (as most other people outside of the Fedora Foundation or Red Hat) > > > don't know more details. > > > Great, ... master piece of communication with RH ... ;) > > > > How about you asking your predecessor GDK, on behalf of FESCO? > > > > http://fedora.redhat.com/About/contact.html lists him as the FF's "legal > > inquiries" contact person. > > That *was* my statement, directly from my blog. It's still my statement. > "Business considerations that prevented certain Mono components from being > included in Fedora previously have now been resolved." > > I don't like it. No one likes it, near as I can tell. It is what it is. Superb - I hope you understand, what this makes you and RH look like to me - "Community orientation" definitely looks different. > If and when I can say more, I assure you that I will. OK, then let's take "Mono's role as too uncooked" and postpone all decisions on Mono until you can say more. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 04:05:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:05:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250405.k0P45b8h020531@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-24 23:05 EST ------- Hi Orion, I just downloaded, built, and installed your 1.0.1-1 SRPM. The alternatives bits look OK (although I've not looked at them thoroughly) but the /usr/bin/mpi*.openmpi programs all seg-fault with similar errors: mpic++.openmpi: error while loading shared libraries: libopal.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory so it looks like the configure arguments need work -- I think we need to specify --libdir=/usr/lib/openmpi In any case, thank you for finding some time to look at 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 Wed Jan 25 04:27:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:27:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250427.k0P4RYxQ024265@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-24 23:27 EST ------- "Currently the rpm will only install with --force, though the required libmxp is installed with the distro. I havn't solved this yet." Please update the report when you have solved this problem, Fedora cannot accept a package with a problem like 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 Wed Jan 25 04:44:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:44:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176580] Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250444.k0P4ioOG026227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |wtogami at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-24 23:44 EST ------- Error: Missing Dependency: /etc/X11/app-defaults/ is needed by package x11-ssh-askpass Am I missing something? This is FC5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 04:49:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:49:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: xmms-adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250449.k0P4nLpu026666@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: adplug-xmms |Review Request: xmms-adplug Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |wtogami at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-24 23:49 EST ------- # Package name is adplug-xmms upstream, but Fedora Extras policies # count it as a subpackage to XMMS so it has been renamed xmms-adplug. # For the source tree to match, adplug-xmms was unpacked, the source # directory renamed xmms-adplug and the result repacked to a .tar.gz # file with this name. For this reason the Source: field below is # not accurate. To download the source, get adplug-xmms from the # same source. Please do not do this. It is best to use the upstream source tarball verbatim whenever possible, and simply override the source dir during %prep. %setup -q -n name-version Please fix this and let me know when you're ready 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 Wed Jan 25 04:55:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:55:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250455.k0P4t0Be027336@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-24 23:54 EST ------- Problem solved. I have just updated the spec file and the source rpm. Please see: source rpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.fdr.4.src.rpm spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec I have also designed the autoconf system to build with 'rpm' from a tarball: rpm -ta mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz will work with the file from: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/download/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz Please note this is not the official release. I would like to submit this for consideration to Fedora Extras. I do not plan on the final release of 1.8 to be completed for another solid week if all goes well. At which time the above mentioned files will be updated. Libglade is being bundled with the distro as well - but for RedHat/Fedora specific OS' it will be left as a required 3rd party to be installed with the necessary package manager. Thank you, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 05:10:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:10:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250510.k0P5A8af028961@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |wtogami at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-25 00:09 EST ------- Hmm, it looks like you are basing this package on the old fedora.us guidelines. It is apparent that you haven't read the new Fedora Extras guidelines. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ Please read through the new packaging requirements and process. A few obvious things that need fixing, there might be more... - %define version 1.8 This is unnecessary, just put the number directly after Version: - Release: does not follow the new Extras guidelines - %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.a %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.la Do not ship these within the package. Please delete them perhaps during %install. I suppose it is OK to fix up the spec first in this case, but typically one only submits a package for review only after they have a version that they intend on releasing. Please re-submit another URL when you have read through the packaging guidelines and made necessary changes. Maybe wait until after you have an official 1.8 release too in order to avoid confusion? After package approval, sponsorship of your membership will be based not on the package approval but your demonstration of understanding of the guidelines and process as documented in those web pages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 05:25:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:25:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250525.k0P5PGEL030743@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 00:25 EST ------- Certainly. Will do. Thank you for your time, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 05:25:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:25:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250525.k0P5PwTC030882@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-25 00:25 EST ------- -Source should be http://dl.sourceforge.net/kyndig/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz -Source must be available at dl.sourceforge.net (currently only 1.7 is) -Change Release: see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag -Duplicate Build Requires: glib2-devel provided by gtk2-devel pango-devel provided by gtk2-devel pkgconfig provided by glib2-devel gtk2-devel provided by libglade2-devel -Inconsistant use of RPM_BUILD_ROOT -I'd just define version under Version: -Don't include dist tag in the change log, version-release is fine I could not get this to compile on my FC4 machine. See error below: -------------------------------------- creating libmxp.la (cd .libs && rm -f libmxp.la && ln -s ../libmxp.la libmxp.la) make[2]: *** No rule to make target `../bundled/bundled/pcre/pcre.c', needed by `pcre.lo'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/bundled' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8' make: *** [all] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/rpm-tmp.45059 (%build) ------------------------------------- Looks like Warren beat me to this but I'll submit it anyway because I too am learning the packaging guidelines :-D -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 05:34:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250534.k0P5YnYd032010@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|wtogami at redhat.com |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-25 00:34 EST ------- McGrath is free to take the 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 Wed Jan 25 06:20:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 01:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250620.k0P6KBYb007254@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 01:19 EST ------- "A few obvious things that need fixing, there might be more... - %define version 1.8 This is unnecessary, just put the number directly after Version:" done "- Release: does not follow the new Extras guidelines - %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.a %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.la" %excluded "-Source should be http://dl.sourceforge.net/kyndig/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz" redirected accordingly "-Source must be available at dl.sourceforge.net (currently only 1.7 is)" placed now on dedicated server "-Change Release: see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag" Read ..partially =) "Duplicate Build Requires: glib2-devel provided by gtk2-devel pango-devel provided by gtk2-devel pkgconfig provided by glib2-devel gtk2-devel provided by libglade2-devel" unduplicated "-Inconsistant use of RPM_BUILD_ROOT" consisticised(sp?) "-I'd just define version under Version:" defined "-Don't include dist tag in the change log, version-release is fine" eh - tomato, tomahto I could not get this to compile on my FC4 machine. See error below: -------------------------------------- creating libmxp.la (cd .libs && rm -f libmxp.la && ln -s ../libmxp.la libmxp.la) make[2]: *** No rule to make target `../bundled/bundled/pcre/pcre.c', needed by `pcre.lo'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/bundled' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8' make: *** [all] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /home/IES_CHICAGO/mmcgrath/rpm/BUILD/rpm-tmp.45059 (%build) ------------------------------------- Outstanding - thanks for the feedback, I would have missed that. Minor typo fixed. I made these corrections to the autobuild system itself, reran the headers, regenerated the configure, and rebundled the current distro. Again, I am testing my waters with Fedora. I tried this a year ago and failed miserable ( I did read all the docs back then =) I will update this ticket once the final product is released. Please in the meantime; should I have a newb error, let me know. spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec srpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.fdr.4.src.rpm tarball: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.tar.gz Thank you, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 07:00:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:00:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250700.k0P70ngB011964@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-25 02:00 EST ------- Quick observation based on some comments here, not actually checked: the tarball ships private copies of libglade, libmxp, pcre, sqlite3 and zlib. Private copies like these are problematic from the security point of view, they're hard to track and don't benefit from the distro's updates but must be handled individually. And obviously they bloat binaries. Please make sure that the built package does not use this bundled stuff where the corresponding package is available in FC/FE. This seems to be done for libglade, but I did not notice it being done for pcre, sqlite and zlib. libmxp is not available in FC/FE, so either it should be packaged and submitted separately and this package converted to use the "external" one, or the bundled one used until it is available separately. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 07:02:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:02:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176580] Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250702.k0P72F2E012090@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-25 02:02 EST ------- That's /usr/share/X11/app-defaults in FC5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 07:10:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:10:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176580] Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250710.k0P7AJ5A013136@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-01-25 02:10 EST ------- This could be done with a simple conditional 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 Jan 25 07:27:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:27:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250727.k0P7RkIT014955@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-25 02:27 EST ------- May someone make a review of this package, please? This dependency is blocking qucs update. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 07:33:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:33:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250733.k0P7XkQV015895@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-25 02:33 EST ------- Please is this package needs a formal approve or is it tacitly 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 Wed Jan 25 07:43:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:43:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250743.k0P7hZbc016996@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-25 02:43 EST ------- Why? Has sourceforge stated that they will remove the DNS name http://dowload.sourceforge.net? Well, I think it's like: http://dl.sourceforge.net/adplug/adplay-1.4.tar.gz will take the latest version directly from sourceforge, whereas http://download.sourceforge.net/adplug/adplay-1.4.tar.gz picks a mirror. Why must we not use a mirror? (Right now the mirror is broken, yeah... perhaps that is reason enough :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 08:02:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:02:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250802.k0P82QU6018988@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 03:02 EST ------- It's approved when (a) someone says it's approved *and* (b) changes the blocker bug from FE-REVIEW to FE-ACCEPT. So, no, it's not approved 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 08:06:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:06:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250806.k0P86tD7019514@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 03:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Why? Has sourceforge stated that they will remove the DNS name > http://dowload.sourceforge.net? > > Well, I think it's like: > http://dl.sourceforge.net/adplug/adplay-1.4.tar.gz > > will take the latest version directly from sourceforge, whereas > http://download.sourceforge.net/adplug/adplay-1.4.tar.gz > > picks a mirror. Why must we not use a mirror? (Right now the mirror > is broken, yeah... perhaps that is reason enough :-) Both work fine for me; no need to change it. The usual problem with sourceforge-hosted packages is that people specify "prdownloads.." URLs, which don't work because they pull up the mirror selection page rather than the actual tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 08:11:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:11:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250811.k0P8BXDg020060@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-25 03:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Please is this package needs a formal approve or is it tacitly approved ? There ain't no such thing as a "tacitly approved" package in FE. You just need a bit more patience. In the meantime, you could review some packages, I notice spot has a few open review requests... :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 09:42:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:42:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250942.k0P9gNGc001469@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt.be changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt. | |be ------- Additional Comments From michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt.be 2006-01-25 04:41 EST ------- I tried initng 0.5.2 on FC4. On the whole it was a *very* positive experience. Adding it to the Extras would be nice. Minor issues I noticed. - english mistakes in messages; - lack of documentation (I had too google to find the --interactive argument to initng); - some debatable coding (all state information is in a global called 'g' (ungreppable)); - some bugs (e.g. sometimes stopping a daemon does not seem to work if it dependent on a service in the same file); - booting hung while starting the daemon udev/udevd hung because udevd does not recognize the --daemon argument (easily fixable); - sometimes sound devices are not created, this is clearly a udevd issue; - often console switches to cyrillic for a while (ugly); - console flashes (ugly); - kernel messages on consose (ugly but easily fixed by adding -c 1 to klogd); - no integration yet with rhgb (easily fixable I presume). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 09:48:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:48:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: xmms-adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601250948.k0P9mwnf001987@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-25 04:48 EST ------- OK it's fixed, sorry for this real stupid mistake :-( Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/xmms-adplug-1.1-4.src.rpm The package itself is ready for review, but cannot be reviewed until bug 177818 has been resolved however. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 10:07:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:07:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176109] Review Request: pytraffic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251007.k0PA7L8Y003886@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt.be 2006-01-25 05:07 EST ------- Ping... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Wed Jan 25 10:23:07 2006 From: Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric TANGUY) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:23:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: required and recommended Message-ID: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Is there a mean to put in a package informations about other packages recommended but not formally required. I know it's possible in debian packages but is it possible with rpm ? I think that i have read something about this in this list but i can't find it. Thanks Eric From fedora at camperquake.de Wed Jan 25 10:39:06 2006 From: fedora at camperquake.de (Ralf Ertzinger) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:39:06 +0100 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Message-ID: <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> Hi. > Is there a mean to put in a package informations about other packages > recommended but not formally required. I know it's possible in debian > packages but is it possible with rpm ? RPM does not support this. From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Wed Jan 25 10:51:36 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:51:36 -0800 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> (Ralf Ertzinger's message of "Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:39:06 +0100") References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> Message-ID: >>>>> "RE" == Ralf Ertzinger writes: RE> Hi. >> Is there a mean to put in a package informations about other >> packages recommended but not formally required. I know it's >> possible in debian packages but is it possible with rpm ? RE> RPM does not support this. Not yet, but rpm-4.4.3 (not yet in Rawhide) will have "Suggests:" and "Enhances:" tags, see: http://wraptastic.org/blog/?p=36 Don't know how they are supposed to work yet. A.y From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 10:57:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:57:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251057.k0PAvuYO009703@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 05:57 EST ------- Yes, the distro does not install any of these bundled libs if you already have one installed. This includes pcre-devel, sqlite3-devel, and zlib.h (whichever package that is frome) Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:08:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:08:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178900] New: Review Request: monodoc 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=178900 Summary: Review Request: monodoc Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com 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-1.1.9-2.src.rpm Description: Monodoc is the documentation plugin for monodevelop which lists just about every part of the .NET (with mono extensions). Warning : srpm is about 18Mb in size. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:08:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:08:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251108.k0PB86JU011341@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 06:07 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > Yes, the distro does not install any of these bundled libs if you already have > one installed. This includes pcre-devel, sqlite3-devel, and zlib.h (whichever > package that is frome) zlib.h is from zlib-devel You should enforce the installation of the required -devel packages on the buildsystem to ensure that the system versions of these libraries are used. You'd do this by adding BuildRequires for the relevant packages. As it happens, zlib-devel would be pulled in by freetype-devel, which is a dep of pango-devel, which is a dep of gtk2-devel, which you already have listed as a BuildRequire. In fact, you could also remove gtk2-devel from the BuildRequires list because that itself is a dep of libglade2-devel. You'll probably need to add pcre-devel and sqlite3-devel 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 Wed Jan 25 11:09:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:09:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178901] New: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp 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=178901 Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com 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-2.0-2.src.rpm Description: gtksourceview-sharp is a C sharp binder for gtksourceview -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:11:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:11:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178902] New: Review Request: ikvm 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=178902 Summary: Review Request: ikvm Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm-0.22-1.src.rpm Description: This package provides MonoDevelop, a full-featured IDE for Mono with syntax colouring, code completion, debugging, project management and support for C sharp, Visual Basic.NET, Java, Boo, Nemerle and MSIL -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:12:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:12:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178903] New: Review Request: ikvm 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=178903 Summary: Review Request: ikvm Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm-0.22-2.src.rpm Description: This package provides IKVM.NET, an open source Java compatibility layer for Mono, which includes a Virtual Machine, a bytecode compiler, and various class libraries for Java, as well as tools for Java and Mono interoperability. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:16:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:16:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178904] New: Review Request: Monodevelop 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=178904 Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com 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-0.9-2.src.rpm Description: This package provides MonoDevelop, a full-featured IDE for Mono with syntax colouring, code completion, debugging, project management and support for C sharp, Visual Basic.NET, Java, Boo, Nemerle and MSIL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:18:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:18:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178902] Review Request: ikvm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251118.k0PBIW04013334@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=178902 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-25 06:18 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 178903 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:18:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:18:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178903] Review Request: ikvm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251118.k0PBIiXn013374@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-25 06:18 EST ------- *** Bug 178902 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 Wed Jan 25 11:20:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:20:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251120.k0PBK9PO013614@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-25 06:20 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/mysql-connector-net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-5.src.rpm Updated 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 Wed Jan 25 11:21:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:21:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178905] New: Review Request: smbldap-tools 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=178905 Summary: Review Request: smbldap-tools Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/smbldap-tools/smbldap-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/smbldap-tools/smbldap-tools-0.9.1-2.src.rpm Description: In conjunction with OpenLDAP and Samba-LDAP servers, this collection is useful to add, modify and delete users and groups, and to change Unix and Samba passwords. In those contexts they replace the system tools to manage users, groups and passwords. Note that version 0.8.7 of smbldap-tools is shipped with samba itself and is included as %doc in the samba RPM. This package is a later version, tweaked to put files in sensible places rather than under /opt. Of course, it does not conflict with the samba 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 Jan 25 11:21:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] New: Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash 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=178906 Summary: Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-SmbHash/perl-Crypt-SmbHash.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-SmbHash/perl-Crypt-SmbHash-0.12-1.src.rpm Description: This module generates Lanman and NT MD4 style password hashes, using perl-only code for portability. The module aids in the administration of Samba style systems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 11:47:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 06:47:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178905] Review Request: smbldap-tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251147.k0PBlcHK017616@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smbldap-tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178905 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 06:47 EST ------- Bah, upstream released a new version. New SRPM: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/smbldap-tools/smbldap-tools-0.9.2-1.src.rpm Spec URL remains unchanged. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 12:35:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:35:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251235.k0PCZere026451@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpo at di.uminho.pt ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-25 07:35 EST ------- MD5SUMS: 53a9bdce3844e866ee62b7ed2d8b9845 perl-Crypt-SmbHash-0.12-1.src.rpm a6e3f4d65a89bfcc9ba0c69691e6105b Crypt-SmbHash-0.12.tar.gz 61922d1c2bfd8b7613b98cdbd3ffc208 perl-Crypt-SmbHash.spec Sources: * Crypt-SmbHash-0.12.tar.gz: MD5 digest verified against CPAN copy Good: * URL and Source URL ara valid * License verified (main POD page) * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * File permissions are OK * Builds without problems in FC3 and FC5t2 * (Un)installs without problems in FC3 and FC5t2 Needswork: * since Digest::MD4 is being required it should also be used by the test suite (just add it as a build requirement) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 12:43:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:43:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251243.k0PChDYg027592@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-25 07:43 EST ------- Consider the package approved if you also add Digest::MD4 as a BR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 12:47:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251247.k0PClMgv028082@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 07:47 EST ------- I had thought about that. Since its Fedora/RedHat spec - I can compile the binary with the standard sqlite3, pcre, zlib, libglade2 that comes with Fedora and place a requirement for them in the spec. The -devel isn't required though - only for compiling are these libs needed. The source itself makes use of a few functions in these 3rd party softwares. For Fedora the packaging is pretty simple - its keeping it available for most linux flavors that is requiring me to bundle the required portions of 3rd party software needed. I'll add the standard 3rd party software available in Fedora to the spec requirement then. ( sqlite3, pcre, libglade2, libxml2 ) The autoconf system itself if you read configure.in - http://cvs.mudmagic.com/co.php/mudmagic_client/configure.in?r=1.14 handles tarball compile requirements by performing a check on the local OS for the needed libs - and compiling them in with the client if missing. Thanks for the pointer, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 12:47:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:47:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251247.k0PClHrD028052@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 07:46 EST ------- Spec and SRPM updated with Digest::MD4 as a BR. Updated SRPM: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-SmbHash/perl-Crypt-SmbHash-0.12-2.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 Wed Jan 25 12:51:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251251.k0PCpAgg028712@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 07:51 EST ------- Add the -devel packages as BuildRequires (not just Requires) to ensure that the needed header files are installed for the configure script to detect them. The library deps should be handled automatically by RPM so there should be no need to add a Requires: for pcre, libglade2, libxml2, and probably sqlite3 too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Wed Jan 25 13:05:03 2006 From: Eric.Tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric TANGUY) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:05:03 +0100 (CET) Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> Message-ID: <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> >>>>>> "RE" == Ralf Ertzinger writes: > > RE> Hi. >>> Is there a mean to put in a package informations about other >>> packages recommended but not formally required. I know it's >>> possible in debian packages but is it possible with rpm ? > > RE> RPM does not support this. > > Not yet, but rpm-4.4.3 (not yet in Rawhide) will have "Suggests:" and > "Enhances:" tags, see: > > http://wraptastic.org/blog/?p=36 > > Don't know how they are supposed to work yet. > > A.y > Will it be included in FC5 ? Eric From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Jan 25 13:11:32 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:11:32 +0100 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Message-ID: <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Eric TANGUY wrote: > Will it be included in FC5 ? > Eric I would love to see this in fc5 :) and of course fc and fe packages using it ^^ - - Andreas - -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD13kEQEQyPsWM8csRAjoOAJ9Vgc5unpaxtRIEjId2YvieSfboyQCfborY eK6Vpz23u6TaqyZa8zWcvRM= =72pp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 13:35:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:35:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251335.k0PDZ9cr001955@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dennis at conversis.de 2006-01-25 08:34 EST ------- In my opinion the following bugs aren't "minor" and should be fixed before this can land in extras: - some bugs (e.g. sometimes stopping a daemon does not seem to work if it dependent on a service in the same file); - booting hung while starting the daemon udev/udevd hung because udevd does not recognize the --daemon argument (easily fixable); - sometimes sound devices are not created, this is clearly a udevd issue; - often console switches to cyrillic for a while (ugly); -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 13:45:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:45:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251345.k0PDjj5d003270@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-25 08:45 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 Wed Jan 25 13:58:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:58:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178906] Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251358.k0PDw6rX004958@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 08:57 EST ------- Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 13:58:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:58:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178905] Review Request: smbldap-tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251358.k0PDwDIt005000@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smbldap-tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178905 Bug 178905 depends on bug 178906, which changed state. Bug 178906 Summary: Review Request: perl-Crypt-SmbHash https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178906 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE 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 Wed Jan 25 14:37:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:37:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251437.k0PEbot3011059@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-25 09:37 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.2-2.2.6.15_1.1871_FC5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.2-2.2.6.15_1.1871_FC5.src.rpm * Tue Jan 24 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-2 - Use standard kernel install instead of doing it manually. - Don't let the makefile choose optimization flags because it gets it wrong when building i686 packages in mock on an x86_64 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 14:47:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:47:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251447.k0PElKBj012353@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-25 09:47 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.2-3.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.2-3.src.rpm * Mon Jan 23 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.2-3 - provide zaptel-kmod-common -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 25 15:06:02 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:06:02 -0500 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> Message-ID: <604aa7910601250706w4373b505v631f15573a2af4db@mail.gmail.com> On 1/25/06, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > I would love to see this in fc5 :) and of course fc and fe packages using it ^^ Unless the tools that live on top of librpm understand how to make use and to negotiate the new tags, having them be used in fc or fe packages isn't going to be particularly useful unless you do all your package administration via rpm on the cmdline. In fact it might lead to unexpected and undesired behavior. I don't think these new tags should be allowed as part of FC or FE policy until its clear that the new tags behave as expected when the default in-core tools have to deal with them. And any understanding as to potentially problems is going to require some local system testing from people who are interested in using these tags in their packaging. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for these new features to be acceptible packaging policy. I fully expect there is going to have to be work done to support these new tags by tools other than rpm cli. Until we know where we stand with the tools that intereact with librpm, i say no dice. -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 15:09:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:09:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] New: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX 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=178922 Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.3-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.3-1.src.rpm Description: Asterisk is a complete PBX in software. It runs on Linux and provides all of the features you would expect from a PBX and more. Asterisk does voice over IP in three protocols, and can interoperate with almost all standards-based telephony equipment using relatively inexpensive hardware. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 15:34:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:34:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173035] Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251534.k0PFY9uc020687@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: chmlib - Library for dealing with ITSS/CHM format files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173035 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-25 10:34 EST ------- Peter, Could you build chmlib for FC-4 and FC-3? The FC-3 and FC-4 CVS branches can be created via the Wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded Thanks, jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 16:13:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:13:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178932] New: Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration 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=178932 Summary: Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: thierry at fdl.ath.cx QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: SRPM Name or Url: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/autoscan/AutoScan-0.98.0b-Fedora-Core4.src.rpm?download Description: (http://autoscan.free.fr) AutoScan is an application designed to explore and manage your network. Entire subnets can be scanned simultaneously without human intervention. It features OS detection, automatic network discovery, a port scanner, a Nessus client, a Samba share browser, and the ability to save the network state. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 16:23:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:23:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 170504] Review Request: makebootfat - Utility for creation bootable FAT disk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251623.k0PGNYss030687@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: makebootfat - Utility for creation bootable FAT disk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170504 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-25 11:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > I think it would be better to behave like grub package, i.e. place these > x86-specific files under /usr/share/makebootfat/x86/* . IMHO it is more correct, > because under /usr/lib we should place some HOST-specific internal binaries, but > actually these two files are TARGET-specific... OK, doing it like grub makes sense in that respect. Do it that way, and tell upstream about this discussion about where to put these files, if you would please. 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 Wed Jan 25 16:59:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:59:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177275] Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251659.k0PGxO4i006633@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-25 11:59 EST ------- Review for release 1: * 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 Needs work: * BuildRequires: perl should not be included (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#Exceptions) * Missing SMP flags. If it doesn't build with it, please add a comment (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake) * The package should contain the text of the license (wiki: PackageReviewGuidelines) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 17:23:42 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:23:42 +1300 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> Message-ID: <1138209822.6539.0.camel@pingu.homenetwork.lan> On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 14:05 +0100, Eric TANGUY wrote: > >>>>>> "RE" == Ralf Ertzinger writes: > > > > RE> Hi. > >>> Is there a mean to put in a package informations about other > >>> packages recommended but not formally required. I know it's > >>> possible in debian packages but is it possible with rpm ? > > > > RE> RPM does not support this. > > > > Not yet, but rpm-4.4.3 (not yet in Rawhide) will have "Suggests:" and > > "Enhances:" tags, see: > > > > http://wraptastic.org/blog/?p=36 > > > > Don't know how they are supposed to work yet. > > > > A.y > > > Will it be included in FC5 ? > Eric > Even if it is in FC5, you would still have to wait for the yum devs to add support for the additional tags. Michael From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 17:50:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:50:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175127] Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251750.k0PHorC8015925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-25 12:50 EST ------- OK I've finally had a chance to patch wavbreaker to default to ALSA. The updated package and SPEC can be found here: SRPM: http://homer.homelinux.net/RPMS/wavbreaker-0.6.1-6.src.rpm SPEC: http://homer.homelinux.net/RPMS/wavbreaker.spec Please let me know if there are any further problems or changes needed. Otherwise what are the next steps for getting wavbreaker included in 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 Wed Jan 25 17:53:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:53:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251753.k0PHrweP016553@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-25 12:53 EST ------- (In reply to comment #10) > ran "./build-utils/bootstrap" in the nucleo source dir to generate the configure > script. The source built foe me with a a rpmbuild -ba nucleo.spec but was > unsucessfull with mock > here is a link for the rpms i was able to build and the spec file used > http://www.fedorajim.homelinux.com/rpms/nucleo-1232006/ In this case, you will need to make a patch that generate the configure script. Here is a tutorial: http://www.linux.com/howtos/RPM-HOWTO/build-it.shtml Once you create it, add it on your spec file and make sure it is available on SOURCE folder. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:04:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:04:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178951] New: Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment 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=178951 Summary: Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment 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: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: orion at cora.nwra.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/modules.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/modules-3.2.0-1.src.rpm Description: The Environment Modules package provides for the dynamic modification of a user's environment via modulefiles. Each modulefile contains the information needed to configure the shell for an application. Once the Modules package is initialized, the environment can be modified on a per-module basis using the module command which interprets modulefiles. Typically modulefiles instruct the module command to alter or set shell environment variables such as PATH, MANPATH, etc. modulefiles may be shared by many users on a system and users may have their own collection to supplement or replace the shared modulefiles. Modules can be loaded and unloaded dynamically and atomically, in an clean fashion. All popular shells are supported, including bash, ksh, zsh, sh, csh, tcsh, as well as some scripting languages such as perl. Modules are useful in managing different versions of applications. Modules can also be bundled into metamodules that will load an entire suite of different applications. I have the following rpmlint errors that I'd like to ignore: E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/tcsh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/bash W: modules hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/Modules/init/.modulespath E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/.modulespath E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/csh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/zsh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/python E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/perl E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/sh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/ksh Also, I'd be interested in people think /etc/profile.d/ files should be created to initialize the module system by default. I'm tempted to, but my question is that our users use the tcsh, can you have a /etc/profile.d/blah.tcsh and blah.csh with the appropriate one being loaded for each? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:10:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:10:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177082] Review Request: wm-icons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251810.k0PIAh4U020146@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-25 13:10 EST ------- + mock succesfully build the source RPM - Source0 should list the full path of URL: %{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 should be, for example, http://wm-icons.sourceforge.net/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 - Changelog has a typo: " * Fri Jan 06 2006 James Lawrence 0.4.0-3.FC4 - modified spec file removed FC4 from release line " You mean version 0.3.0-3? - rpmlint generated these errors: W: wm-icons non-standard-group X11/Window Managers W: wm-icons incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.4.0-3.FC4 0.3.0-3 E: wm-icons no-binary W: wm-icons symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/menu /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/16x16-general E: wm-icons zero-length /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/16x16-kde/_symlinks.lst W: wm-icons symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/norm /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/48x48-general E: wm-icons standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/icons W: wm-icons devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/wm-icons-config W: wm-icons symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/mini /usr/share/icons/wm-icons/14x14-general Could you make sure to do both md5sum and sha1sum on source tarball for both SRPM and the downloaded tarball you received? These methods are used for security process. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:21:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:21:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251821.k0PILV9g022616@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 somlo at cmu.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |somlo at cmu.edu ------- Additional Comments From somlo at cmu.edu 2006-01-25 13:21 EST ------- > %{_sbindir}/asterisk > %{_sbindir}/astgenkey > %{_sbindir}/astman > %{_sbindir}/autosupport > %{_sbindir}/rasterisk > %{_sbindir}/safe_asterisk > %{_sbindir}/smsq > %{_sbindir}/stereorize > %{_sbindir}/streamplayer You should probably do %{_sbindir}/* instead ? > > %{_mandir}/man8/asterisk.8* > %{_mandir}/man8/astgenkey.8* > %{_mandir}/man8/autosupport.8* > %{_mandir}/man8/safe_asterisk.8* How about %{_mandir}/man8/* > > %defattr(-,asterisk,asterisk,-) > > %dir %{_sysconfdir}/asterisk > %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/asterisk/adsi.conf > %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/asterisk/adtranvofr.conf ... ... > %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/asterisk/zapata.conf Enumerating all the conf files is rather and prone to omission when something new gets added in a future version. You kind-of have to do it here because you want postgres and odbc conf files in separate subpackages. Here's a question for the more experienced packagers on the list: Is there a way to specify "all files in a directory *except* foo, bar, and blah" ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:26:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:26:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251826.k0PIQvbQ023714@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 13:26 EST ------- Thank you for the help and info. I updated my Fedora distro and performed several tests of the BuildRequires and Requires to ensure the package requirements are correct for both installing a binary rpm and rebuilding the rpm from either a source rpm or the tarball. I added the BuildRequires for the needed libs. I also added the Requires macro - though it isn't required, I'd prefer to have a user know the name of the package they need to install to satisfy requirements; opposed to the name of the shared object missing. These updates have been committed to CVS and the autoconf system for building. spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec srpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.fdr.4.src.rpm tarball: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz Once more - a warm thanks for the attention and help everyone has shown and given, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:33:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178932] Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251833.k0PIXlKD025357@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 somlo at cmu.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |somlo at cmu.edu ------- Additional Comments From somlo at cmu.edu 2006-01-25 13:33 EST ------- You should probably include a direct url for the spec file in addition to the src.rpm. You're mixing $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}. Either is fine, but pick one and be consistent. You should probably not install doc/AutoScan/* into %{buildroot} during %install, but rather just mention it using '%doc Data/doc/Autoscan' in the %files section. Zooming out to the bigger picture, you probably want separate subpackages for AutoScan_Agent (at least if it's supposed to run independently of, and comunicate with, the main system). you should also add a %changelog section at the end, and document revisions to your .spec file in there. There's probably more, but this should get you started... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 18:57:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:57:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251857.k0PIvFwu030082@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-25 13:57 EST ------- The best way to check BuildRequires is I think to use mock (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy/Mock). This builds your package in a minimal chroot with only your additionally-specified build-requirements added, so if you've missed anything it usually causes the build to fail (or sometimes produce packages that are missing features). Other suggestions: * Don't use an Epoch: tag if it's going to be "0" * Use Release: 0.4%{?dist} rather than Release: 0.fdr.4 * Replace "1.8" with "%{version}" in the Source: tag for easier spec maintenance * The %configure macro should set CFLAGS so there's no need to do it yourself * Use e.g. "%post -p /sbin/ldconfig" rather than "%post" and "/sbin/ldconfig" on separate lines * Add changelog entries for your changes so it doesn't look like the last change was by Michael Schwendt in 2004 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 19:03:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:03:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176109] Review Request: pytraffic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251903.k0PJ3hs0031335@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-25 14:03 EST ------- I can't sponsor, unfortunately. Have you considered splitting off a noarch data subpackage for most of the arch independent data under /usr/share? Then make the main package depend on 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 wart at kobold.org Wed Jan 25 19:10:38 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:10:38 -0800 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: <200601251821.k0PILV9g022616@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200601251821.k0PILV9g022616@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <43D7CD2E.2000702@kobold.org> bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: [...] > Enumerating all the conf files is rather and prone to omission when > something new gets added in a future version. You kind-of have to do it > here because you want postgres and odbc conf files in separate subpackages. > > Here's a question for the more experienced packagers on the list: > Is there a way to specify "all files in a directory *except* foo, bar, > and blah" ? You can use %exclude to omit specific files. This is useful in cases like this where one or two files in a directory are part of a subpackage. --Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 19:09:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:09:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178951] Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251909.k0PJ95qT032439@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178951 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-01-25 14:08 EST ------- It might be proper to mention why modules is popular in its description since few may know about it: When you have several versions of the same software, in a mixed POSIX environment, but still have the same home directory for all these POSIX system, you need to be able to switch between the different versions of the software by altering the system path. Modules solves this. Administrators put in different versions and releases of software at different paths (typically on a fileserver), configures modules with the paths and then let the user switch in and out the different versions and releases for the currently running operating system from the command line. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Fedora at TQMcube.com Wed Jan 25 19:30:21 2006 From: Fedora at TQMcube.com (David Cary Hart) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:30:21 -0500 Subject: System-Config-Control Message-ID: <20060125143021.24411c8e@dch.TQMcube.com> Great idea! Nifty little package. FWIW, this requires system-logviewer to be fully functional which does not seem to be available as a Fedora package. The RHEL package works just fine. -- Our DNSRBL - Eliminate Spam: http://www.TQMcube.com Multi-RBL Check: http://www.TQMcube.com/rblcheck.php Zombie Graphs: http://www.TQMcube.com/zombies.php From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 19:52:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:52:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601251952.k0PJqkmw010885@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-25 14:52 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > %{_sbindir}/* [...] > %{_mandir}/man8/* [...] > Enumerating all the conf files is rather and prone to omission when > something new gets added in a future version. Actually, many packagers prefer to explicitly enumerate things that should be in a package so that an omitted file won't go unnoticed (rpmbuild will fail on installed but unpackaged files), and that new files won't accidentally sneak in. Use of wildcards means that neither of these will be noticed. They're useful sometimes though. > Is there a way to specify "all files in a directory *except* foo, bar, > and blah" ? /a/* %exclude /a/foo %exclude /a/bar %exclude /a/blah Caveat on using %exclude: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/89661 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 20:36:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:36:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178932] Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252036.k0PKajGc020073@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From thierry at fdl.ath.cx 2006-01-25 15:36 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://autoscan.free.fr/Fedora/AutoScan.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 Jan 25 20:37:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:37:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252037.k0PKbV0k020272@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-25 15:37 EST ------- - Use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, not ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} - libxml2-devel is provided by libglade2-devel - Description should be in sentence form (put a period after MudMagic.Com.) - Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig - Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig - Mock build failed (Also failed on my machine): libtool: install: warning: remember to run `libtool --finish /usr/lib/mudmagic/libs' make[2]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'. make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/bundled' make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/bundled' Making install in interface make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' /bin/sh ../mkinstalldirs /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins mkdir -p -- /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins mkdir: cannot create directory `/usr/lib/mudmagic': Permission denied make[2]: *** [install-exec-local] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make[1]: *** [install-am] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8107 (%install) Fix the build problem and Paul's comments and I think you'll be in pretty good shape. Though I haven't been able to actually build the package 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 sundaram at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 20:43:13 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:13:13 +0530 Subject: System-Config-Control In-Reply-To: <20060125143021.24411c8e@dch.TQMcube.com> References: <20060125143021.24411c8e@dch.TQMcube.com> Message-ID: <43D7E2E1.80102@redhat.com> David Cary Hart wrote: >Great idea! Nifty little package. > >FWIW, this requires system-logviewer to be fully functional which does not seem >to be available as a Fedora package. The RHEL package works just fine. > > gnome-system-log within gnome-utils could be called in Fedora. File a bug report and we will fix this. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 25 22:01:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252201.k0PM1FSZ005767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-25 17:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #15) > make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' > /bin/sh ../mkinstalldirs /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins > mkdir -p -- /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins > mkdir: cannot create directory `/usr/lib/mudmagic': Permission denied > make[2]: *** [install-exec-local] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' > make[1]: *** [install-am] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' > make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8107 (%install) > One of the install targets in the Makefile is not obeying DESTDIR. You'll have to patch the following line in interface/Makefile.in: install-exec-local: $(mkinstalldirs) @plugin_libdir@ to install-exec-local: $(mkinstalldirs) $DESTDIR at plugin_libdir@ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 22:11:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:11:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252211.k0PMBKK5007295@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-25 17:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #16) > $(mkinstalldirs) $DESTDIR at plugin_libdir@ Whoops. $(mkinstalldirs) $(DESTDIR)@plugin_libdir@ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 22:41:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:41:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252241.k0PMfmkZ011913@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From fedorajim at gmail.com 2006-01-25 17:41 EST ------- I have never created a patch and don't know where to begin. the tutorial you posted shows a simple build a rpm with rpm not patches -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 22:59:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:59:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252259.k0PMxoR8014500@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-25 17:59 EST ------- Remaining issues/questions refered to the current spec file: 1) ksmarttray doesn't require any kde or qt libraries. Is that ok? It has build requirement for kdelibs-devel, so I would assume it requires kdelibs perhaps? 2) smart-gtk should be changed to smart-gui because all other binary distributions of smart use smart-gui as the name and as Rahul Sundaram said: "a number of packages within FC already follow this convention which users are accustomed towards" (other reasons above). 3) rpm version numbers should perhaps be added to the requirements anyway because even though you can't techically trust those, they would tell users/builders/hackers/whoever important information that rpm version needs to be at least 4.3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 23:01:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252301.k0PN1bvC014905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-01-25 18:01 EST ------- New version: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/openmpi-1.0.1-2.src.rpm This uses --includedir and --libdir to specify install locations and create /etc/ld.so.conf.d/openmpi.conf to point to the library directory. This gives us some funky directory structures, but oh well: /usr/include/openmpi /usr/include/openmpi/mpi.h /usr/include/openmpi/mpif.h /usr/include/openmpi/openmpi /usr/include/openmpi/openmpi/ompi /usr/include/openmpi/openmpi/ompi/mpi /usr/include/openmpi/openmpi/ompi/mpi/cxx /usr/include/openmpi/openmpi/ompi/mpi/cxx/comm.h /usr/lib64/openmpi/openmpi/mca_allocator_basic.so I've also submitted a patch for lam, bug #178967 I'm currently testing with the patched lam. The more eyes on this the better 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 Wed Jan 25 23:05:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:05:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252305.k0PN5d4X015352@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-25 18:05 EST ------- ad 1) If there is a compiled executable linked to a library in the package, RPM automatically picks up the soname dependency, so an explicit "Requires: kdelibs" should not be needed (and is in fact discouraged by the Fedora Extras packaging guidelines). Explicit library dependencies are only needed for interpreted programs (which is why the smart GUI has an explicit dependency on pygtk2). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 23:20:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:20:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252320.k0PNKP2t017175@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-25 18:20 EST ------- Extract original source code tar archive into directory "original". Copy complete directory tree "original" to new directory "modified". Modify the files within directory tree "modified" to your liking. Run: diff -Nur original/ modified/ > mychanges.patch That creates a unified recursive diff (see "man diff"). In your .spec file, add the patch like the "Source" archive. E.g. insert "Patch0: mychanges.patch" near the top lines of the file. Below the %prep section, add: %patch0 -p1 -b .mychanges That will apply Patch0 with the "patch" command (man patch). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 25 23:24:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:24:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601252324.k0PNOAjC017806@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-25 18:23 EST ------- I wrote this before I saw the above comment from Kevin Kofler: -- Perhaps you have left out kdelibs from ksmarttray requirements in purpose because rpm will add the library files as automatic file deps anyway. It seems the majority of the packages doesn't say they require glibc for example. They just require libc.so.6 as an automatic file dep. So this wasn't important really. And if you think about it, I'd say the file deps are in a sense more accurate even as they only require what is absolutely necessary and also don't take a stand about which package should provide them (less to maintain in the spec file). Well, you can't think the auto deps will always take care of everything but with C-libraries they do just that. And kdelibs here is a package which contain C-libraries. -- Good to know there is a policy about this. Kevin Kofler, can you say if there's also policy for the gui package name issue and the rpm version number issue? A policy would define what to do here so we would not have to argue about this matter. So just forget about the first issue, only two left if you ask me (I don't count the usermode issue because I agree with Enrico Scholz there). :) 1) smart-gtk --> smart-gui 2) rpm version numbers to requirements -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 00:32:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:32:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260032.k0Q0Wrx9026596@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-25 19:32 EST ------- Ok, I'll read the spec file line by line and comment here. I'll be commenting every little detail. Sorry if you don't like my style, but I think it's better to say everything at once - even minor details. Ok, here we go... - Why are the source and patch numbers not growing from 1 to 2 etc. (Not really an issue. I just wonder if there's some technical reason for that.) - Packages don't usually use that precise build root dir. Perhaps they should though and here this is done how it should be done. :) (Not really an issue either.) - I would not provide smartpm-* there because this package is named smart and because this will be the initial one there should not be need for those provides. One name for one software. - What's smart-plugins? Newer heard. If you made that up as "this would be a good idea to have" I'd say don't, because there should not be provides which don't really mean something. I looked quickly at dag's spec file and at least there is no smart-plugins provided. If you thought this package provides smart plugins that is not correct as the gui for example is not in this package. Or perpaps I didn't get it... - Don't provide smart-tui because the shell is not a tui. There could be a real tui in the future (dialog style). Shell is not a dialog. I'd say provide smart-shell because of this - and because "smart --shell" is something the user knows. - Require rpm version >= 4.3 even though it can be overridden with epoch. Just so that the package will tell that rpm >= 4.3 should be used. - Change smart-gtk to smart-gui. And mention that the frontend is graphical so that the less techies out there understand what it is. - Remove obsoletes from smart-gui (if you agree to change the name to smart-gui). Don't provide smartpm-gui or smartpm-gtk because this is smart, not smartpm. Things would be different if smart would have already been packaged somewhere as "smartpm" and there would be possible requirements for it in other packages. - If smart-gui (or smart-gtk) belongs to Applications/System, how can ksmarttray belong to System Environment/Base? A mistake? Should be the same as the gui package? - Shouldn't smart-usermode obsolete smart-update and not ksmarttray? I might be wrong but if you just read the decriptions you get that impression. - The gui package description should say more clearly that it provides a graphical user interface / frontend. Non-techies don't know what a GTK frontend means. - Does %configure contain $RPM_OPT_FLAGS? It would be good to build the package using optimizations. Also, is there a macro for the make command (I think there is)? Perhaps use that and not just "make"? - Same goes for "install". Perhaps use the macro instead? - You use "touch" there. Shouldn't you require /bin/touch then? Or is there a macro for it instead? - You use "test" there. The same thing here. Either there is a macro or you should require "/usr/bin/test". - You use "gtk-update-icon-cache". Shouldn't you require "/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache" then? - And require those commands in the correct package (if used when installing a subpackage, require in subpackage). Ok, done. You have plenty of issues to comment now. Perhaps I was nitpicking but at least I was reading the spec precise enough so I don't have to reread it and write more 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 01:31:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:31:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176205] Review Request: GZLauncher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260131.k0Q1VPsH001602@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GZLauncher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176205 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-25 20:31 EST ------- No locales is not necessarily bad. It just means there is no translated messages you would need the %find_lang macro for. See the packaging guidelines. I'm going through a checklist of things before approval. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 02:05:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:05:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260205.k0Q25nHa006297@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-25 21:05 EST ------- (In reply to comment #35) > GUI is not GUI (gtk apps do not work fine in non-gnome environments), > so I like it when the used toolkit is visible in the package name. Um, that isn't strictly true. You can run GNOME/GTK apps in a KDE environment (e.g. abiword runs fine in KDE) and vice-versa, so long as the base libraries are installed, you don't actually need to be running that particular. Also KDE apps (such as scribus) work fine in GNOME. I've run smart in KDE (or even FVWM2 for that matter) and it works just fine. So I vote for the subpackage to be named smart-gui not smart-gtk. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 03:16:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:16:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260316.k0Q3GQe5016235@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-25 22:16 EST ------- " * Don't use an Epoch: tag if it's going to be "0" " removed " * Use Release: 0.4%{?dist} rather than Release: 0.fdr.4 " used " * Replace "1.8" with "%{version}" in the Source: tag for easier spec maintenance " this is actually already present, the mudmagic.spec is created during configure with mudmagic.spec.in which uses an @VERSION@ variable to output the mudmagic source version " * The %configure macro should set CFLAGS so there's no need to do it yourself " Removed CFLAGS " * Use e.g. "%post -p /sbin/ldconfig" rather than "%post" and "/sbin/ldconfig" on separate lines " Used - and also used for %postun " * Add changelog entries for your changes so it doesn't look like the last change was by Michael Schwendt in 2004 " Added all entries from this ticket with appropriate credits " - Use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, not ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} " using %{buildroot} now " - libxml2-devel is provided by libglade2-devel " removed libxml2-devel " - Description should be in sentence form (put a period after MudMagic.Com.) " period added " - Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig - Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig " These two requires added " - Mock build failed (Also failed on my machine): " Rewrote the method of --prefix and --exec-prefix handling for autoconf. I won't go into details - but it was a heavy rewrite. included the usage of user defined variables for installation directories opposed to hard coded directory locations in Makefile.am files and configure.in file. Autoconf build system rebuilt and changes commited to CVS. spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec srpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.4.src.rpm tarball: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz Thank you all, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bmxmarine at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 02:59:09 2006 From: bmxmarine at yahoo.com (jlj hkjhk) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:59:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: please remove me Message-ID: <20060126025910.60417.qmail@web36605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mpeters at mac.com Thu Jan 26 04:20:33 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:20:33 -0800 Subject: firestarter orphaned Message-ID: <1138249233.18743.1.camel@locolhost.localdomain> About a week ago I offered to take firestarter from the orphaned list. Assuming there are no objections in the next few days, that's still the plan. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 05:52:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:52:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260552.k0Q5qQaV005993@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-26 00:52 EST ------- Update Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.3-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.3-1.src.rpm * Wed Jan 25 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-4 - Took some tricks from Asterisk packages by Roy-Magne Mo. - Enable gtk console module. - BR gtk+-devel. - Add logrotate script. - BR sqlite2-devel and new sqlite subpackage. - BR doxygen and graphviz for building duxygen documentation. (But don't build it yet.) - Update IP TOS patch. * Wed Jan 25 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-3 - Completely eliminate the "asterisk" user from the spec file. - Move more config files to subpackages. - Consolidate two patches that patch the init script. - BR curl-devel - BR alsa-lib-devel - alsa, curl, oss subpackages * Wed Jan 25 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-2 - Do not run as user "asterisk" as that prevents setting of IP TOS (which is bad for quality of service). - Add patch for setting TOS separately for SIP and RTP packets. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 05:55:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:55:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260555.k0Q5tIHk006314@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-26 00:55 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > %{_sbindir}/* > [...] > > %{_mandir}/man8/* > [...] > > Enumerating all the conf files is rather and prone to omission when > > something new gets added in a future version. > > Actually, many packagers prefer to explicitly enumerate things that should be in > a package so that an omitted file won't go unnoticed (rpmbuild will fail on > installed but unpackaged files), and that new files won't accidentally sneak in. > Use of wildcards means that neither of these will be noticed. This is exactly my sentiment. I want to know what I'm putting into the package. If a new version comes out that adds/removes a file, I'll know about it when I try and build the new version and can deal with 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 Thu Jan 26 06:40:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 01:40:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260640.k0Q6eiAb010860@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-26 01:40 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > Thanks all. > New version : > Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl.spec > SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl-0.0.1-1.src.rpm > > rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm > W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.so ... > W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire.h > > I think it's not relevant with this package. What makes you think so? I disagree on this. If these files are host development files (very likely), then they should go to a *-devel package, if these files are target development files they are miss-places. I'd suggest you to implement a *-devel package. Besides this, there are further minor issues: * freehdl-config --cxxflags returns -I/usr/include * freehdl-config --ldflags returns -L/usr/lib * Some of the doc files aren't utf-8 nor asci encoded (German umlauts, probably iso8859-1 or iso8859-15 encoded). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 07:29:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:29:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260729.k0Q7TO4C015954@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-26 02:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) ... > > I think it's not relevant with this package. > What makes you think so? I disagree on this. > If these files are host development files (very likely), then they should go to > a *-devel package, if these files are target development files they are > miss-places. I'd suggest you to implement a *-devel package. I don't know what to do about it! at the beginning i have implemented a devel package but contacting upstream and comparing with ghdl (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172547) leads me to make only one package as for a compliler. All these files are needed by freehdl to be compiled with gcc. I'm not a specialist with this so i would like to have more opinions. > Besides this, there are further minor issues: > * freehdl-config --cxxflags returns -I/usr/include > * freehdl-config --ldflags returns -L/usr/lib I'm not sure to see where the problem is. the returns seems fine for me. no ? > * Some of the doc files aren't utf-8 nor asci encoded (German umlauts, probably > iso8859-1 or iso8859-15 encoded). You are right. How to solve 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 Thu Jan 26 08:02:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:02:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260802.k0Q820uE019462@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-01-26 03:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > ... > > > I think it's not relevant with this package. > > What makes you think so? I disagree on this. > > If these files are host development files (very likely), then they should go to > > a *-devel package, if these files are target development files they are > > miss-places. I'd suggest you to implement a *-devel package. > > I don't know what to do about it! at the beginning i have implemented a devel > package but contacting upstream and comparing with ghdl > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172547) leads me to make > only one package as for a compliler. All these files are needed by freehdl to be > compiled with gcc. I'm not a specialist with this so i would like to have more > opinions. I don't know about ghdl, and can't comment on it. May-be it's carelessly packaged - I don't know. However, that's why I asked if these files are host (linux) or target (vhdl) files. If these are target files, they must be shipped as part of the application package, but must be moved out of the standard include/library paths . If these are host files and specify the API to the libraries inside of the library package, then these files belong into a devel package. If the applications (compiler) require the headers and/or libraries, then it proably would be best to split the package into 3 subpackages, say apps, devel and libs. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with this package's details and also could not find any example on how to use it. Do you have a pointer to an example? This would help clarifying this point. > > Besides this, there are further minor issues: > > * freehdl-config --cxxflags returns -I/usr/include > > * freehdl-config --ldflags returns -L/usr/lib > > I'm not sure to see where the problem is. the returns seems fine for me. no ? No, /usr/lib and /usr/include are on the system include/library paths in GCC. Therefore, explicitly passing them to the compiler always is a bug because it interferes with the system include/library paths (cf. -isystem in gcc.info rsp. man gcc). Should a package require them, its design is broken. > > * Some of the doc files aren't utf-8 nor asci encoded (German umlauts, probably > > iso8859-1 or iso8859-15 encoded). > > You are right. How to solve this ? Apply iconv ("iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf-8") to the source files somewhere inside of the spec (e.g. in %prep). Alternatively, you could do this outside of the spec and apply a patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 26 08:23:35 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:23:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060126082335.E8AB780EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 5 libpolyxmass-0.9.0-5.fc3 polyxmass-bin-0.9.0-1.fc3 polyxmass-doc-0.8.8-1.fc3 scim-skk-0.5.2-1.fc3 tinyerp-3.2.0-1.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 Jan 26 08:23:52 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:23:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060126082352.4B30E80EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 gnome-sudoku-0.4.0-5.fc4 libpolyxmass-0.9.0-5.fc4 polyxmass-bin-0.9.0-1.fc4 polyxmass-doc-0.8.8-1.fc4 scim-skk-0.5.2-1.fc4 sobby-0.3.0-0.fc4 system-config-control-1.0-4.fc4 tinyerp-3.2.0-1.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 Thu Jan 26 08:20:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:20:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260820.k0Q8Ka8s022111@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-26 03:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #18) > " * Replace "1.8" with "%{version}" in the Source: tag for easier spec naintenance " > this is actually already present, the mudmagic.spec is created during configure > with mudmagic.spec.in which uses an @VERSION@ variable to output the mudmagic > source version Actually I would still suggest making this change. The reason for this is that although you generate a spec file yourself during configure, that is not the spec file that is used when you rebuild an SRPM. And since this is a package for Fedora Extras, the spec file will eventually be held in Fedora's cvs and will need to be maintained there too. Using %{version} will at least result in smaller diffs :-) > " - Use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, not ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} " > using %{buildroot} now There's nothing wrong with ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} really (as long as you're consistent about it and don't use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in the same spec), but %{buildroot} is fine too (and what I ise in my own specs). > " - Mock build failed (Also failed on my machine): " > Rewrote the method of --prefix and --exec-prefix handling for autoconf. I won't > go into details - but it was a heavy rewrite. included the usage of user defined > variables for installation directories opposed to hard coded directory locations > in Makefile.am files and configure.in file. Build in mock still fails. Making install in interface make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' /bin/sh ../mkinstalldirs /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins mkdir -p -- /usr/lib/mudmagic/plugins mkdir: cannot create directory `/usr/lib/mudmagic': Permission denied make[2]: *** [install-exec-local] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make[1]: *** [install-am] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/mudmagic-1.8/interface' make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.93171 (%install) There's a missing $(DESTDIR) in that mkinstalldirs invocation. > spec: > http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec > srpm: > http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.4.src.rpm > tarball: > http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz I'd suggest incrementing the RPM release number each time you change the spec, and include the release number in the changelog entries, which makes them easier to follow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Thu Jan 26 08:25:21 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:25:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060126082521.C807980EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 22 allegro-4.2.0-5 azureus-2.3.0.6-19.fc5 cernlib-2005-12.fc5.1 dosbox-0.63-7.fc5 dosbox-0.63-8.fc5 gnome-sudoku-0.4.0-5.fc5 grads-1.9b4-6.fc5 libnjb-2.2.4-2.fc5 libpolyxmass-0.9.0-5.fc5 liferea-1.0.2-2.fc5 lighttpd-1.4.9-2.fc5 linphone-1.2.0-2.fc5 perl-Chart-2.4.1-1.fc5 perl-Crypt-SmbHash-0.12-2.fc5 polyxmass-bin-0.9.0-1.fc5 polyxmass-doc-0.8.8-1.fc5 python-twisted-1.3.0-4 scim-skk-0.5.2-1.fc5 scim-tomoe-0.1.0-2.fc5 system-config-control-1.0-4.fc5 tinyerp-3.2.0-2.fc5 yumex-0.99.2-1.0.fc5 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 Thu Jan 26 08:38:24 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:38:24 +0100 Subject: Fedora Extras 3 and 4: Broken packages removed Message-ID: <20060126093824.015fb239.bugs.michael@gmx.net> After no response by package maintainers on the "broken deps" reports mailed in November or later, I have removed the following binary packages from the repository. Before triggering rebuilds of any updates, please make sure you don't reintroduce broken dependencies. Fedora Extras 3: python-nltk pyxdg smeg Fedora Extras 4: geomview-plugins-1.8.1-11 -------------- 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 Jan 26 08:36:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:36:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601260836.k0Q8asAM025227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-01-26 03:36 EST ------- That's a long list in comment #58 compared to the just-three-items-left list a couple of days ago. :( We don't need to make smart *the perfect package*, it's more important to get its review finalized, before Enrico gets pissed off too much. But I'd like to comment on the suggestion to use macros for make/test etc. For one using a macro there would not replace a Requires:. Either the package in question is in the default Requires: list, or it needs to be set as a dependency independently of whether you use macros to obfuscate the specfile. And I already mentioned the second part about macros: If all they do is replace make with %{__make} then all they do is obfuscate the specfile beyond recognition. Please don't do that! You may argue that %{__foo} will have an absolute path and is therefore safer etc., but the build itself has to be assumed to be in a safe environment and for packages submitted here even in a minimal chroot w/o any broken remnants under /usr/local. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 09:21:06 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 01:21:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to update the package? Message-ID: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi, I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, 1.0-5 with some modification. I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in updating it. Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: 1. cvs co system-config-control 2. cd system-config-control/devel 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" 4. commited the changes 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 file is with all modifications) 6. commited the changes 7. plague-client build system-config-control system-config-control-1_0-4_fc5 fc5 And i got the new version 1.0-4 but it still runs the code of 1.0-3 only. The srpm on the buildsystem itself contains the source of 1.0-3 only though it's 1.0-4.srpm. I don't know what i did wrong. Can somebody please give me the some inputs/exact steps for doing that? Thank You! Ankit Patel --------------------------------- Bring words and photos together (easily) with PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giallu at gmail.com Thu Jan 26 09:45:48 2006 From: giallu at gmail.com (Gianluca Sforna) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:45:48 +0100 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 Message-ID: Is there any reason why the latest updates of rdiff-backup where not issued for FC3? This way, I can no longer use it to backup between my laptop (FC3) and server (FC4). I just verified that the current srpm package for FC4 (rdiff-backup-1.0.1-1.fc4.src.rpm) builds and works correctly also in FC3, so I think it would be just a matter of adding it to the build queue... Cheers Gianluca From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 10:03:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:03:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261003.k0QA3qBH004785@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-26 05:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #177) > - english mistakes in messages; Hmmm... Jimmy (the guy who makes most of the code) is heck of a programmer, but I've seldom seen anyone that's worse in english ;-) Patches are welcome though. > - lack of documentation (I had too google to find the --interactive argument > to initng); Yep. I don't think the project has anyone who's really responsible for documentation, so it's kinda lagging... > - some debatable coding (all state information is in a global called 'g' > (ungreppable)); Hmmm... Might be worth filing a bug about... > - some bugs (e.g. sometimes stopping a daemon does not seem to work if it > dependent on a service in the same file); Could you post a bug about this (with all relevant information) in initng bz? It doesn't sound like a hard fix to me... > - booting hung while starting the daemon udev/udevd hung because udevd does not > recognize the --daemon argument (easily fixable); Are you sure about this? According to udevd manpage udevd _has_ a daemon argument. > - sometimes sound devices are not created, this is clearly a udevd issue; Udev scripts are being heavily worked on. Let's hope this gets fixed. Filing a bug might help too. > - often console switches to cyrillic for a while (ugly); I've been trying to fix this, but it didn't get any better. Check comment #84 above. If anyone can help me out here I would be very glad... > - console flashes (ugly); Flashes? Could you elaborate? > - kernel messages on consose (ugly but easily fixed by adding -c 1 to klogd); Ok, fixed in svn. > - no integration yet with rhgb (easily fixable I presume). Blah. Do we really need rhgb when running 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 paul at city-fan.org Thu Jan 26 10:11:34 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:11:34 +0000 Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> Ankit Patel wrote: > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in updating it. > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > 1. cvs co system-config-control > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > 4. commited the changes > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > file is with all modifications) I suspect the build system already had a system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to upload a new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should have a different version number and hence a different filename. > 6. commited the changes > 7. plague-client build system-config-control A "make build" would suffice for that. Paul. From giallu at gmail.com Thu Jan 26 09:45:48 2006 From: giallu at gmail.com (Gianluca Sforna) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:45:48 +0100 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 Message-ID: Is there any reason why the latest updates of rdiff-backup where not issued for FC3? This way, I can no longer use it to backup between my laptop (FC3) and server (FC4). I just verified that the current srpm package for FC4 (rdiff-backup-1.0.1-1.fc4.src.rpm) builds and works correctly also in FC3, so I think it would be just a matter of adding it to the build queue... Cheers Gianluca From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 10:11:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:11:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261011.k0QABP5s005683@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-26 05:11 EST ------- I contacted the upstream team to obtain some explanation : ---------- the freehdl thingie does this: Probably you understand better then... 1. Translates a VHDL file into C++ file(s). 2. Runs a C++ compiler (gcc) in order to compile the generated files. This is why the header files are required for the app! 3. Runs a C++ compiler (gcc) in order to link the objects produced in step 2 to produce a binary. In this step the libraries are used, so these are required for the app as well! 4. Runs the binary produced in step 3. ---------- so i think all the files are required in only one package, no ? (In reply to comment #15) > No, /usr/lib and /usr/include are on the system include/library paths in GCC. > Therefore, explicitly passing them to the compiler always is a bug because it > interferes with the system include/library paths (cf. -isystem in gcc.info rsp. > man gcc). Should a package require them, its design is broken. The flags etc. necessary if someone would like to relocate the package (other --prefix than /usr). So i think it's an upstream problem, no ? (In reply to comment #15) > Apply iconv ("iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf-8") to the source files somewhere inside > of the spec (e.g. in %prep). Alternatively, you could do this outside of the > spec and apply a patch. Please let me know which files have this problem then i could solve it and fill a bug 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 ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 10:34:41 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:34:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060126103441.7309.qmail@web34604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Paul Howarth wrote: Ankit Patel wrote: > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in updating it. > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > 1. cvs co system-config-control > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > 4. commited the changes > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > file is with all modifications) I suspect the build system already had a system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to upload a new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should have a different version number and hence a different filename. > 6. commited the changes > 7. plague-client build system-config-control A "make build" would suffice for that. Paul. But when i do "make sources" then it gives me the correct source tarball (.bz2). So, i don't understand where is the problem? Regards, Ankit Patel --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? With a free 1 GB, there's more in store with Yahoo! Mail. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at city-fan.org Thu Jan 26 10:40:34 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:40:34 +0000 Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126103441.7309.qmail@web34604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060126103441.7309.qmail@web34604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43D8A722.10204@city-fan.org> Ankit Patel wrote: > */Paul Howarth /* wrote: > > Ankit Patel wrote: > > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in > updating it. > > > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > > 1. cvs co system-config-control > > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > > 4. commited the changes > > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > > file is with all modifications) > > I suspect the build system already had a > system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to up! > load a > new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should > have > a different version number and hence a different filename. > > > 6. commited the changes > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > Paul. > > But when i do "make sources" then it gives me the correct source tarball > (.bz2). So, i don't understand where is the problem? Does it do that if you delete the tarball first? If the tarball is already there then it won't re-download it. You should never issue a new tarball with the same version number and different contents anyway - it's just bad practice. Paul. From ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 10:49:45 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:49:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <43D8A722.10204@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060126104945.84685.qmail@web34610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Paul Howarth wrote: Ankit Patel wrote: > */Paul Howarth /* wrote: > > Ankit Patel wrote: > > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in > updating it. > > > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > > 1. cvs co system-config-control > > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > > 4. commited the changes > > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > > file is with all modifications) > > I suspect the build system already had a > system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to up! > load a > new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should > have > a different version number and hence a different filename. > > > 6. commited the changes > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > Paul. > > But when i do "make sources" then it gives me the correct source tarball > (.bz2). So, i don't understand where is the problem? Does it do that if you delete the tarball first? If the tarball is already there then it won't re-download it. You should never issue a new tarball with the same version number and different contents anyway - it's just bad practice. Paul. Yes, it replace the older one. I got a reference from the following link: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq#head-7f697c90440af1ee38c3627531ccbfbb918b3267 Regards, Ankit Patel --------------------------------- Bring words and photos together (easily) with PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Jan 26 10:57:27 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:57:27 +0100 Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:11:34 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: > Ankit Patel wrote: > > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in updating it. > > > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > > 1. cvs co system-config-control > > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > > 4. commited the changes > > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > > file is with all modifications) What modifications? Are you the author of the software, too? In that case, please increase the version from 1.0 to something newer, so the version reflects the differences between older releases of the tarball with the same name. Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" file within CVS and not just add entries to it. "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. > I suspect the build system already had a > system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to upload a > new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should have > a different version number and hence a different filename. No, the checksum of the files in the lookaside cache is taken into account. You can have multiple files with the same file name, but a different checksum. Which file to download is determined by the contents of the "sources" file in the CVS directory. Check the contents of your "sources" file in CVS. > > 6. commited the changes > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > Paul. > From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 10:59:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:59:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261059.k0QAxveF013736@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-26 05:59 EST ------- > - no integration yet with rhgb (easily fixable I presume). Blah. Do we really need rhgb when running initng? The question here in my eyes is... do we want to completly integrate initng into fedora or not. rhgb is enabled by default on a core install so it should also work with initng in my eyes. just my opinion. end users want eye candy. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 11:05:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178903] Review Request: ikvm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261105.k0QB59PI014764@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-01-26 06:05 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/ikvm-0.22-3.src.rpm Changelog Fixed to correctly include IKVM.GNU.Classpath -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 11:06:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:06:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261106.k0QB6n0o015080@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-26 06:06 EST ------- SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-5.src.rpm d'oh! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 11:11:21 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:11:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060126111121.85116.qmail@web34603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:11:34 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: > Ankit Patel wrote: > > I am maintaining the package called "system-config-control". Current > > version of this package is 1.0-4. I want to provide the new version, > > 1.0-5 with some modification. > > > > I have tried the following steps, but haven't any luck in updating it. > > > > Here are the steps i followed for updating from 1.0-3 to 1.0-4: > > 1. cvs co system-config-control > > 2. cd system-config-control/devel > > 3. modified the spec file with release no. "4%{?dist}" > > 4. commited the changes > > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > > file is with all modifications) What modifications? Are you the author of the software, too? In that case, please increase the version from 1.0 to something newer, so the version reflects the differences between older releases of the tarball with the same name. Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" file within CVS and not just add entries to it. "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. > I suspect the build system already had a > system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2 uploaded and so attempting to upload a > new one would have no effect. If the tarball has changed, it should have > a different version number and hence a different filename. No, the checksum of the files in the lookaside cache is taken into account. You can have multiple files with the same file name, but a different checksum. Which file to download is determined by the contents of the "sources" file in the CVS directory. Check the contents of your "sources" file in CVS. > > 6. commited the changes > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > Paul. > On which no. from the given steps i should have to do "make tag"? Regards, Ankit Patel --------------------------------- Bring words and photos together (easily) with PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nphilipp at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 11:14:41 2006 From: nphilipp at redhat.com (Nils Philippsen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:14:41 +0100 Subject: iscan license question In-Reply-To: <20060123234414.GA22595@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138056865.2583.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123234414.GA22595@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <1138274081.19757.13.camel@gibraltar.stuttgart.redhat.com> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 00:44 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Would be, if iscan could be packaged that way. Unfortunately, it still requires > a non-free, binary-only library libesmod.so.1. So, is it OK to package that > library even if we don't have its source? I've heard from a reasonably > reliable source that iscan is included in Fedora Directory Server. ;) Hmm, I'm curious about why scanning software should be included with FDS, sure that this isn't just a name-dupe? Nils -- Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp at redhat.com "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759 PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Jan 26 11:24:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:24:55 +0100 Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060126122455.7e85253b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:57:27 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > 5. make sources FILES="system-config-control-1.0.tar.bz2" (This .bz2 > > file is with all modifications) > Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead > of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" > file within CVS and not just add entries to it. Should read: Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead of "make upload FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" file within CVS and not just add entries to it. Probably step 5 is a type mistake and meant to read "make upload FILES=..." "make sources" only downloads the source tarballs specified within the "sources" file. "make upload FILES=..." and "make new-sources FILES=..." upload files into Fedora Extras lookaside cache. The former adds files to the "sources" file contents, the latter creates the "sources" file from scratch. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Jan 26 11:29:11 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:29:11 +0100 Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126111121.85116.qmail@web34603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060126111121.85116.qmail@web34603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060126122911.2bca8162.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:11:21 -0800 (PST), Ankit Patel wrote: > > > 6. commited the changes > > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > > > Paul. > > > > On which no. from the given steps i should have to do "make tag"? First, could you please quote e-mail contents in a more eye-friendly way? That is, prefix quoted parts with something like "> ", so it is easy to find the new pieces written by you. Also please disable HTML! Your messages have been going to the trash folder here due to filtering. Many other subscribers delete HTML mail directly. Answer: Step 6.5. You need to tag the files within CVS prior to running "make build". From ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 11:31:14 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:31:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to update the package? In-Reply-To: <20060126122911.2bca8162.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060126113114.77862.qmail@web34602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:11:21 -0800 (PST), Ankit > Patel wrote: > > > > > 6. commited the changes > > > > 7. plague-client build system-config-control > > > > > > A "make build" would suffice for that. > > > > > > Paul. > > > > > > > On which no. from the given steps i should have to > do "make tag"? > > First, could you please quote e-mail contents in a > more eye-friendly > way? That is, prefix quoted parts with something > like "> ", so it is > easy to find the new pieces written by you. > > Also please disable HTML! Your messages have been > going to the trash > folder here due to filtering. Many other subscribers > delete HTML mail > directly. > > > Answer: Step 6.5. You need to tag the files within > CVS prior > to running "make build". > Thanks for helping me! Ankit __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 11:28:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:28:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261128.k0QBS8MQ018761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From sabih at lahorebiz.com 2006-01-26 06:28 EST ------- For some wierd reason I need to install MPICH on Fedora Core 4 instead of MPICH2, but I could not get to compile it completely using gfortran default Fedora FORTRAN compiler. Infact mpipcc and mpif77 works perfectly, but mpif90 does not seem to work. Could anyone guide me how to compile mpi correctly in Fedora. Thanks in advance and best regards. Yours Sincerely, Sabih D. Khan Email: sabih at lahorebiz.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 fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 26 11:35:17 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:35:17 +0100 Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 11:57 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: >[...] > Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead > of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" > file within CVS and not just add entries to it. > > "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. > [....] We really should update the wiki with a proper, more detailed description how to update a package. The section "How do I update an existing package in CVS?" on http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq#head-7f697c90440af1ee38c3627531ccbfbb918b3267 should be enhanced (maybe it should be a separate page in the wiki). Something like "run 'cvs diff -u' before committing changes and look if everything is okay" should also find its way into it. And questions like "I uploaded foo-1.1.tar.bz2 in the devel branch -- do I have to re-upload it in the FC-4 branch?" should be answered there as well. Any volunteers? Cu thl From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 11:43:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:43:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261143.k0QBhc6c021902@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-26 06:43 EST ------- just some general info/rant about asterisk since i deployed it various times already on production servers. actually to have bri cards working there are 3 ways. misdn bristuff and visdn. misdn: broken piece and the upstream dev wrote me half a year ago that he wants to get it into the standard kernel (nothing i can see happened though) bristuff: ugly hack that requires you to patch various compenents including zaptel and asterisk. visdn: seems to be the new shiny solution to all that mess. hope that helps while its not directly relevant for the package itsself in my eyes that infos are still relevant for getting a production ready asterisk. bri cards are rather widespread because they are relatively cheap (junghanns/beronet quad and octo cards e.g.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 11:51:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:51:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261151.k0QBprBd023106@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-26 06:51 EST ------- just curious... why do you "noreplace" all configs? dont we want to have the unmodified default configs replaced? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 26 12:25:55 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:25:55 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 12:35, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 11:57 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > >>[...] >> Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead >> of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" >> file within CVS and not just add entries to it. >> >> "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. >> [....] > > We really should update the wiki with a proper, more detailed > description how to update a package. > > The section "How do I update an existing package in CVS?" on My stupid way of doing things is to just create a separate srpm for all branches (%{dist} is my friend), cvs-import them (whith the import script magically noticing already-uploaded sources and tagging everything as needed) then make plague. ie only two commands to remember, I know it's dreadfully inefficient on the software side but it's easier on me. -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 12:32:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:32:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261232.k0QCWUR0028591@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-26 07:32 EST ------- > Use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, not ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} Huh? May I ask the reason for that? ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} is perfectly fine. > I also added the Requires macro - though it isn't required, I'd > prefer to have a user know the name of the package they need to > install to satisfy requirements; opposed to the name of the shared > object missing. Veto. It is a mistake. If more packagers attempt at sneaking in dependencies on hardcoded package names where automatic dependencies on sonames suffice, we will need to make this a strict policy - a MUST NOT. We rely on rpmbuild's automatic soname dependencies. We don't care whether the package which provides libsqlite3.so.0 is called sqlite3, sqlite or libsqlite3. > * Add changelog entries for your changes so it doesn't look like > the last change was by Michael Schwendt in 2004 " Oh, please! Especially if that old changelog entry is useless anyway. The spec file has been modified a lot since then without mentioning the changes, packaging bugs have been reintroduced and things like that. > Added all entries from this ticket with appropriate credits Please don't. Don't act as the ghostwriter of other people. Don't use other people's names for work you did on the spec file. This is really impolite IMO, > * Wed Jan 25 2005 Warren Togami - 1.8 > - %define version @ VERSION @ removed > Version: defined with the @ VERSION @ macro from configure > exlude %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.a > exlude %{_libdir}/libmudmagic.la since Warren did not write this changelog entry himself. Apart from that, the entry is quite incomprehensible (at least to me). And it's spelled "exclude" not "exlude". ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ankit644 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 26 12:44:18 2006 From: ankit644 at yahoo.com (Ankit Patel) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:44:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060126124418.91599.qmail@web34611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 12:35, Thorsten Leemhuis a > ???crit : > > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 11:57 +0100 schrieb > Michael Schwendt: > > > >>[...] > >> Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources > FILES=..." instead > >> of "make sources FILES=...". The former will > replace the "sources" > >> file within CVS and not just add entries to it. > >> > >> "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. > >> [....] > > > > We really should update the wiki with a proper, > more detailed > > description how to update a package. > > > > The section "How do I update an existing package > in CVS?" on > > My stupid way of doing things is to just create a > separate srpm for all > branches (%{dist} is my friend), cvs-import them > (whith the import script > magically noticing already-uploaded sources and > tagging everything as > needed) then make plague. > > ie only two commands to remember, I know it's > dreadfully inefficient on > the software side but it's easier on me. > > > -- > Nicolas Mailhot So, Here are the Final steps :- 1 ./cvs-import.sh -b -m "import Joe's update" ~/bar-2.1-1.src.rpm 2 cd ../ 3 make plague Correct me if i am wrong again ! Thanks, Ankit __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 26 12:50:37 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:50:37 +0100 Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 13:25 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 12:35, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 11:57 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > >>[...] > >> Also make sure you prefer "make new-sources FILES=..." instead > >> of "make sources FILES=...". The former will replace the "sources" > >> file within CVS and not just add entries to it. > >> "make tag" is missing in your steps, btw. > >> [....] > > We really should update the wiki with a proper, more detailed > > description how to update a package. > > The section "How do I update an existing package in CVS?" on > > My stupid way of doing things is to just create a separate srpm for all > branches (%{dist} is my friend), cvs-import them (whith the import script > magically noticing already-uploaded sources and tagging everything as > needed) then make plague. There is one reason why I'm currently considering to forbid the use of cvs-import for already imported packages: Most people won't run a diff against the old package/the old spec this way before committing (or does the script force a diff before committing? I never used it for anything else than importing). I run a "cvs diff -u" every time before I commit something and now and then (every fifth package round about) I find debug leftovers or small errors this way *before* committing them. Maybe I'm just to stupid and other people never make such errors -- but I suspect they do. CU thl From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 13:48:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:48:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261348.k0QDm0Fa008761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-26 08:47 EST ------- > Good to know there is a policy about this. Kevin Kofler, can you say if > there's also policy for the gui package name issue and the rpm version > number issue? A policy would define what to do here so we would not have > to argue about this matter. I don't think there is, otherwise it would have been brought up already by the people knowing more than me. ;-) > - Shouldn't smart-usermode obsolete smart-update and not ksmarttray? I > might be wrong but if you just read the decriptions you get that impression. Other ksmarttray packages are linked against smart-update, so doing what you suggest could cause conflicts. Obsoleting it in ksmarttray doesn't have that problem. > - Same goes for "install". Perhaps use the macro instead? > > - You use "touch" there. Shouldn't you require /bin/touch then? Or is there a > macro for it instead? > > - You use "test" there. The same thing here. Either there is a macro or you > should require "/usr/bin/test". I think these are base tools which can be assumed to just be there. > - You use "gtk-update-icon-cache". Shouldn't you require > "/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache" then? That makes sense (if it isn't already being required - it's part of the gtk2 package), it should be a Requires(post) 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 Thu Jan 26 14:00:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:00:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261400.k0QE0qqD011498@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-26 09:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > > actually to have bri cards working there are 3 ways. > > misdn bristuff and visdn. > > [...] > > hope that helps while its not directly relevant for the package itsself in my > eyes that infos are still relevant for getting a production ready asterisk. > > bri cards are rather widespread because they are relatively cheap > (junghanns/beronet quad and octo cards e.g.) My Asterisk package does not at this time include support for plain 'ol Zaptel cards. I know that this leaves Europeans in a bit of a lurch because of all of the BRI hardware over there. I'll look into the various BRI options once the base Asterisk package is approved and see if I can't get something into FE. (In reply to comment #6) > just curious... why do you "noreplace" all configs? dont we want to have the > unmodified default configs replaced? Users may or may not be depending on the configuration that is in the "default" configuration files. If the default configuration files change it would be better for the administrator to manually take a look at all of the .rpmnew files and decide if any changes are going to break his/her setup. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 14:01:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:01:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173661] Review Request: xfce4-fsguard-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261401.k0QE1rEk011695@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-fsguard-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173661 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-26 09:01 EST ------- Build on all targets succeeded. 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 Thu Jan 26 14:04:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:04:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173550] Review Request: xfce4-netload-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261404.k0QE4M6B012193@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-netload-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173550 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-26 09:04 EST ------- Build on all targets succeeded. 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 Thu Jan 26 15:00:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:00:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261500.k0QF0Kvx021677@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-26 10:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > > > actually to have bri cards working there are 3 ways. > > > > misdn bristuff and visdn. > > > > [...] > > > > hope that helps while its not directly relevant for the package itsself in my > > eyes that infos are still relevant for getting a production ready asterisk. > > > > bri cards are rather widespread because they are relatively cheap > > (junghanns/beronet quad and octo cards e.g.) > My Asterisk package does not at this time include support for plain 'ol Zaptel > cards. I know that this leaves Europeans in a bit of a lurch because of all of > the BRI hardware over there. I'll look into the various BRI options once the > base Asterisk package is approved and see if I can't get something into FE. Yup thats pretty fine to me i just wanted to point out the problem in general. visdn seems to be the cleanest solution though. only backdraw yet is missing echo suppression since its young. > (In reply to comment #6) > > just curious... why do you "noreplace" all configs? dont we want to have the > > unmodified default configs replaced? > Users may or may not be depending on the configuration that is in the "default" > configuration files. If the default configuration files change it would be > better for the administrator to manually take a look at all of the .rpmnew files > and decide if any changes are going to break his/her setup. well but how about the other case? lets assume we go ahead various versions of asterisk... and how high do you eval the chance the the old config will be broken in newer releases? in my eyes if they werent changed by the user they should really be replaced by the new versions default configs. i am not sure if theres a policy regarding that or not. just an 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 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 26 15:09:30 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:09:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <20060126124418.91599.qmail@web34611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060126124418.91599.qmail@web34611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <52055.192.54.193.25.1138288170.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 13:44, Ankit Patel a ?crit : > So, > > Here are the Final steps :- > 1 ./cvs-import.sh -b -m "import Joe's > update" ~/bar-2.1-1.src.rpm > 2 cd ../ > 3 make plague > > Correct me if i am wrong again ! That's what works for me. You have to use dist carefully to avoid collisions though -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 15:10:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:10:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261510.k0QFA0jt023064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-26 10:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > lets assume we go ahead various versions of asterisk... and how high do you > eval the chance the the old config will be broken in newer releases? in my eyes > if they werent changed by the user they should really be replaced by the new > versions default configs. i am not sure if theres a policy regarding that or > not. %config(noreplace) does not mean that unedited config files will not be replaced - they will. The difference in behaviour between %config and %config(noreplace) comes in when the user has edited the config file. With %config, the user's edited file will be renamed to file.rpmsave and the new package's config file will take its place. With %config(noreplace), the user's edited file will be left alone and the new package's file will be installed as file.rpmnew. %config(noreplace) should generally be used for config files unless there's a good reason not to use (noreplace). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Jan 26 15:16:07 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:16:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <65205.192.54.193.25.1138288567.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 13:50, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 13:25 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: >> Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 12:35, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > >> My stupid way of doing things is to just create a separate srpm for all >> branches (%{dist} is my friend), cvs-import them (whith the import >> script >> magically noticing already-uploaded sources and tagging everything as >> needed) then make plague. > > There is one reason why I'm currently considering to forbid the use of > cvs-import for already imported packages: Most people won't run a diff > against the old package/the old spec this way before committing (or does > the script force a diff before committing? I never used it for anything > else than importing). Actually my full workflow is cvs update package_I_need_to_change, modify spec in devel, rpm -ba --define "dist .fc5" on result, import, sometimes diff files with other branches The big downside of doing check-ins manually is you're not pushing what you've tested, and it's real easy to "forget" a file and get wrong results. With import of srpm generated in -ba you ensure not bit is forgotten. (printing a diff of the result would be helpful so you can do a final check before make plague) > I run a "cvs diff -u" every time before I commit something and now and > then (every fifth package round about) I find debug leftovers or small > errors this way *before* committing them. Maybe I'm just to stupid and > other people never make such errors -- but I suspect they do. I'm stupid the other way - when doing fine-grained commits I always forget stuff -- Nicolas Mailhot From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 15:15:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:15:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261515.k0QFF3es023935@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 che666 at gmail.com 2006-01-26 10:14 EST ------- > lets assume we go ahead various versions of asterisk... and how high do you > eval the chance the the old config will be broken in newer releases? in my eyes > if they werent changed by the user they should really be replaced by the new > versions default configs. i am not sure if theres a policy regarding that or > not. %config(noreplace) does not mean that unedited config files will not be replaced - they will. The difference in behaviour between %config and %config(noreplace) comes in when the user has edited the config file. With %config, the user's edited file will be renamed to file.rpmsave and the new package's config file will take its place. With %config(noreplace), the user's edited file will be left alone and the new package's file will be installed as file.rpmnew. %config(noreplace) should generally be used for config files unless there's a good reason not to use (noreplace). well(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > lets assume we go ahead various versions of asterisk... and how high do you > > eval the chance the the old config will be broken in newer releases? in my eyes > > if they werent changed by the user they should really be replaced by the new > > versions default configs. i am not sure if theres a policy regarding that or > > not. > %config(noreplace) does not mean that unedited config files will not be replaced > - they will. The difference in behaviour between %config and %config (noreplace) > comes in when the user has edited the config file. With %config, the user's > edited file will be renamed to file.rpmsave and the new package's config file > will take its place. With %config(noreplace), the user's edited file will be > left alone and the new package's file will be installed as file.rpmnew. > %config(noreplace) should generally be used for config files unless there's a > good reason not to use (noreplace). if thats the behaviour i am pretty fine with it. p.s. back then when i last looked at it i couldnt find proper documentation about %config really. thanks for clearing that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 15:18:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:18:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176618] Review Request: ushare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261518.k0QFIoAF024789@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ushare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176618 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-01-26 10:18 EST ------- New spec looks good, all blockers resolved, 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 Thu Jan 26 15:45:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:45:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261545.k0QFjpNA031680@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-26 10:45 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > > My Asterisk package does not at this time include support for plain 'ol Zaptel > cards. Uhh.. this should have been "My Asterisk package _only_ includes support for plain 'ol Zaptel cards." -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 15:50:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:50:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261550.k0QFolBg032673@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-26 10:50 EST ------- >> - You use "gtk-update-icon-cache". Shouldn't you require >> "/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache" then? > That makes sense (if it isn't already being required - it's part of the gtk2 > package), it should be a Requires(post) though. Wrong. From "ScriptletSnippets" wiki page regarding "GTK+ icon cache": "Note that no dependencies should be added for 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 26 16:11:37 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:11:37 +0100 Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <65205.192.54.193.25.1138288567.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <65205.192.54.193.25.1138288567.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1138291897.2638.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 16:16 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 13:50, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 13:25 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > >> Le Jeu 26 janvier 2006 12:35, Thorsten Leemhuis a ?crit : > > > >> My stupid way of doing things is to just create a separate srpm for all > >> branches (%{dist} is my friend), cvs-import them (whith the import > >> script > >> magically noticing already-uploaded sources and tagging everything as > >> needed) then make plague. > > > > There is one reason why I'm currently considering to forbid the use of > > cvs-import for already imported packages: Most people won't run a diff > > against the old package/the old spec this way before committing (or does > > the script force a diff before committing? I never used it for anything > > else than importing). > > Actually my full workflow is cvs update package_I_need_to_change, modify > spec in devel, rpm -ba --define "dist .fc5" on result, import, sometimes > diff files with other branches > > The big downside of doing check-ins manually is you're not pushing what > you've tested, and it's real easy to "forget" a file and get wrong > results. > > With import of srpm generated in -ba you ensure not bit is forgotten. Well, new files don't happen that often and in my opinion it's more important that people run a "cvs diff" before committing stuff. > (printing a diff of the result would be helpful so you can do a final > check before make plague) Before commit would be better. Anybody here that is willing to implement this? > > I run a "cvs diff -u" every time before I commit something and now and > > then (every fifth package round about) I find debug leftovers or small > > errors this way *before* committing them. Maybe I'm just to stupid and > > other people never make such errors -- but I suspect they do. > > I'm stupid the other way - when doing fine-grained commits I always forget > stuff That happens, sure. But I prefer that people look at the stuff they commit -- if they don't do it and if nobody else watches the commit closely a lot of small errors slip in. If a file is forgotten plague will notice soon and complain ;-) Anyway, Nicolas feel free to use the import stuff. But I would prefer if new users and especially inexperienced packagers would use a scheme were they see and check what they have changed. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From pertusus at free.fr Thu Jan 26 16:16:13 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:16:13 +0100 Subject: cephes-1.3 would anyone like to adopt this? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060126161613.GB4068@free.fr> > http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/cephes-1.3-1.src.rpm > > cephes is a well-know small library of useful numerical special functions. There is allready a private cephes version in grace (which is very similar with the one you propose). The original cephes library, however, is at: http://www.moshier.net/cephes-math-28.tar.gz which seems to be a newer version, with more precisions/library functions available. There are also makefiles, but I believe it'll be quite a pain to have it in shape with fedora, especially if shared libs are wanted. Regarding the licence, there are some files related with cephes licence within grace, that state that the author permits the cephes redistribution under the LGPL that I found on the net and come from the debian project. On the web I also found that there are wrappers, at least a perl and a python wrapper. I don't have time to package it, but I could be part of the review. Regarding portability, there are 2 issues that may be problematic, but that I don't know enough to comment, namely 64 bit cleaness and use of assembly language. -- Pat From lists at arctur.us Thu Jan 26 16:34:44 2006 From: lists at arctur.us (Mitch Skinner) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:34:44 -0800 Subject: Mono apps in extras In-Reply-To: <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138098162.7477.34.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <1138099396.21471.67.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1138100626.5294.78.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138293284.16221.11.camel@firebolt> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 12:03 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > According to RH until recently, mono/C#/.net are subject to potential > patent claims. I don't have any inside information from RH or FF, but I have noticed that the main patent application that's been discussed (the API patent application) recently became abandoned. Microsoft received a non-final rejection last October 21st, and they had three months to fix the application, but they didn't do anything. Now that they've missed the deadline, they can't try a whole new application, because (under US law) you have to file a patent application within a year of publishing the details of the invention, and it's been more than a year. I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice, but I did spend some time reading the US patent office's patent examiner manual. As far as I can tell, the only way they can revive that patent application is if they can show that there was an unavoidable or unintentional delay for the whole three months. I think that's pretty unlikely, so I personally feel a lot more comfortable about using/contributing to mono and mono apps. There may be other patents or other patent applications, but I haven't seen anyone directly identify any. The one I'm talking about is here: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='20030028685'.PGNR.&OS=DN/20030028685&RS=DN/20030028685 Mitch From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 16:55:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:55:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261655.k0QGtbus015967@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-26 11:55 EST ------- "We rely on rpmbuild's automatic soname dependencies. We don't care whether the package which provides libsqlite3.so.0" This certainly makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. When viewed in that manner - it is much more preferrable than using a name for Requires. "Don't act as the ghostwriter of other people." I didn't much care for the ChangeLog requirement myself - I really don't care about ChangeLog entries - but it was a requirement for adding this proejct. I have removed it. The build problem in Mock calls for more looking into as I can not find the location of the error or recreate the issue. Makefile.in is created by running configure by the configure.in and Makefile.am located in the source. It honors prefefix and exec_prefix appropriately. I installed mock and must not have it configured correctly as it just freezes on me when I try building the source rpm ( I did add my user login to the group list ) I'm playing DLL hell with windows packaging right now though and am working on the MAC OSX port. These updates were done. and can be viewed here. Short of an innapropriate entry - this package for Fedora users won't be updated further for rpm packaging ( the source has one final bugfix update before it is released ) I will attempt the Fedora Extra's entry again in about a year with 2.0 release. spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec srpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.4.src.rpm tarball: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz Thanks everyone for the wonderful support and help, Calvin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Thu Jan 26 18:03:00 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:03:00 +0200 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601250706w4373b505v631f15573a2af4db@mail.gmail.com> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> <604aa7910601250706w4373b505v631f15573a2af4db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1138298580.11580.8.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 10:06 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/25/06, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > I would love to see this in fc5 :) and of course fc and fe packages using it ^^ > > Unless the tools that live on top of librpm understand how to make use > and to negotiate the new tags, having them be used in fc or fe > packages isn't going to be particularly useful unless you do all your > package administration via rpm on the cmdline. In fact it might lead > to unexpected and undesired behavior. I don't think these new tags > should be allowed as part of FC or FE policy until its clear that the > new tags behave as expected when the default in-core tools have to > deal with them. And any understanding as to potentially problems is > going to require some local system testing from people who are > interested in using these tags in their packaging. I wouldn't hold > your breath waiting for these new features to be acceptible packaging > policy. I fully expect there is going to have to be work done to > support these new tags by tools other than rpm cli. Until we know > where we stand with the tools that intereact with librpm, i say no > dice. Getting rpm 4.4.4 into FC5 would be the first step though. If it doesn't go into FC5 it'll probably be yet another half a year before people will even start looking into those things. I certainly would like to see rpm >= 4.4.4 in FC5. FWIW apt already has some rudimentary support for "suggests" in my private tree: https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-devel/2006-January/000672.html - Panu - From katzj at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 18:09:44 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:09:44 -0500 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <1138298580.11580.8.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> <604aa7910601250706w4373b505v631f15573a2af4db@mail.gmail.com> <1138298580.11580.8.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> Message-ID: <1138298984.25786.0.camel@bree.local.net> On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 20:03 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 10:06 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On 1/25/06, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > > I would love to see this in fc5 :) and of course fc and fe packages using it ^^ > > > > Unless the tools that live on top of librpm understand how to make use > > and to negotiate the new tags, having them be used in fc or fe > > packages isn't going to be particularly useful unless you do all your > > package administration via rpm on the cmdline. In fact it might lead > > to unexpected and undesired behavior. I don't think these new tags > > should be allowed as part of FC or FE policy until its clear that the > > new tags behave as expected when the default in-core tools have to > > deal with them. And any understanding as to potentially problems is > > going to require some local system testing from people who are > > interested in using these tags in their packaging. I wouldn't hold > > your breath waiting for these new features to be acceptible packaging > > policy. I fully expect there is going to have to be work done to > > support these new tags by tools other than rpm cli. Until we know > > where we stand with the tools that intereact with librpm, i say no > > dice. > > Getting rpm 4.4.4 into FC5 would be the first step though. If it doesn't > go into FC5 it'll probably be yet another half a year before people will > even start looking into those things. I certainly would like to see rpm > >= 4.4.4 in FC5. It's way too late to switch FC5 to a newer version of RPM. Jeremy From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Thu Jan 26 18:46:45 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:46:45 +0200 Subject: required and recommended In-Reply-To: <1138298984.25786.0.camel@bree.local.net> References: <54853.193.52.109.12.1138184587.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <20060125113906.4a63abff@dhcp05.addix.net> <54661.193.52.109.12.1138194303.squirrel@webmail.univ-nantes.fr> <43D77904.9090204@lowlatency.de> <604aa7910601250706w4373b505v631f15573a2af4db@mail.gmail.com> <1138298580.11580.8.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> <1138298984.25786.0.camel@bree.local.net> Message-ID: <1138301205.11580.9.camel@weasel.turre.laiskiainen.org> On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 13:09 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 20:03 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > Getting rpm 4.4.4 into FC5 would be the first step though. If it doesn't > > go into FC5 it'll probably be yet another half a year before people will > > even start looking into those things. I certainly would like to see rpm > > >= 4.4.4 in FC5. > > It's way too late to switch FC5 to a newer version of RPM. Ok, thought that might well be the case. Wont bother you by RFE in bugzilla then :) - Panu - From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 18:48:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:48:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261848.k0QIm2Vw006337@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-26 13:47 EST ------- Oops, so this is a moot point too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 19:02:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:02:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176200] Review Request: Mud Magic Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261902.k0QJ2XqZ009076@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Mud Magic Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176200 ------- Additional Comments From kyndig at mudmagic.com 2006-01-26 14:02 EST ------- Paul - Thank you for taking the time to create the patchset which fixes the problem with the mock-build. The solution you found was an area I had not even looked into. When the interface/Makefile.am was built, it was simply to install the required files for the gtk/glade interface widgets and it never occurred to me that these are the files which were causing the issue. I have applied your patches to the source itself and used your spec file patch to create the mudmagic.spec.in . I reran the autoconf - updated CVS and republished this build. I would have left the patchset as-is; but since the patch modifies to the build system itself and provides a stronger cross-platform build, it was applied directly to the source. spec: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic.spec srpm: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8-0.5.src.rpm tarball: http://www.mudmagic.com/mud-client/downloads/mudmagic-1.8.tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 19:21:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:21:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175237] Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261921.k0QJL43D013059@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175237 ------- Additional Comments From shahms at shahms.com 2006-01-26 14:20 EST ------- The errors are the result of an issue with the system library patch and the fact that I had configobj installed locally. Ideally, I'd package python-configobj and just depend on that; but for now, I just use the one upstream bundles. I can add a copy of the GPL to the package if it's really necessary, but cannot do much about a non-English summary or description. There will be updated files fixing the configobj problem shortly: Spec Url: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/yum/packages/bzr.spec SRPM URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/yum/packages/bzr-0.6.2-2.src.rpm Thanks for looking at 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 redhat.com Thu Jan 26 19:32:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:32:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601261932.k0QJWpHv015587@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|ville.skytta at iki.fi |gdk at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-26 14:32 EST ------- Sorry, there's more noise and opinions here than what I'm willing to spend time working with at the moment -> back to FE-NEW for someone else to take over the review responsibility. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 20:26:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179039] 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=179039 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at xtdnet.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat-1.4.3.0-1.src.rpm Description: socat is a relay for bidirectional data transfer between two independent data channels. Each of these data channels may be a file, pipe, device (serial line etc. or a pseudo terminal), a socket (UNIX, IP4, IP6 - raw, UDP, TCP), an SSL socket, proxy CONNECT connection, a file descriptor (stdin etc.), the GNU line editor (readline), a program, or a combination of two of these. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 20:26:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:26:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179040] New: Review Request: socat 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=179040 Summary: Review Request: socat Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at xtdnet.nl QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat-1.4.3.0-1.src.rpm Description: socat is a relay for bidirectional data transfer between two independent data channels. Each of these data channels may be a file, pipe, device (serial line etc. or a pseudo terminal), a socket (UNIX, IP4, IP6 - raw, UDP, TCP), an SSL socket, proxy CONNECT connection, a file descriptor (stdin etc.), the GNU line editor (readline), a program, or a combination of two of these. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 20:28:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:28:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179039] Review Request:
In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601262028.k0QKSr9p026747@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=179039 paul at xtdnet.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request:
|package name here> Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-26 15:28 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 179040 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 20:29:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:29:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179040] Review Request: socat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601262029.k0QKT9ZS026803@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-26 15:29 EST ------- *** Bug 179039 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 Thu Jan 26 20:32:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:32:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179043] New: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Proxy - A pure Perl HTTP proxy 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=179043 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Proxy - A pure Perl HTTP proxy Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-HTTP-Proxy.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-HTTP-Proxy-0.17-1.src.rpm Description: Its main use should be to record and/or modify web sessions, so as to help users create web robots, web testing suites, as well as proxy systems than can transparently alter the requests to and answers from an origin server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Jan 26 20:55:19 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:55:19 +0100 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting Message-ID: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> Find below a short log from todays FESCo meeting. Full log and this Shortlog in a prettier format is available from: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060126 The Agenda, often with links to some more detailed background on the topics http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule Hint: If you want to know what goes on in FESCo land consider subscribing to Extras/Schedul.* in the wiki (/me hopes that this Regex actually works). * Kernel module standardization Ongoing. We'll use the latest version Ville posted to extras list some days ago. He'll import it to cvs soon. Next on the todo-list: Make the buildsystem handle kmods * Mass Rebuild of FE5 We can't start yet, need to wait for another build in core Core doesn't really worry about dep order when building Looks like we'll ignore the dep-order for rebuilding FE5, too and will let the packagers request rebuilds -- no script * EOL Policy for FE We're waiting for Warren. Some details now at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/EolPolicy * Weekly sponsorship nomination New sponsors: Kevin Fenzi (nirik) and (now for real) Josh Boyer (jwb) * FE-NEEDSPONSOR We have a bug now (#177841) -- do we need more? * Encourage more Extras reviews Create special interest groups? Input needed! * Mono in FE Nobody was there that said "Disallow it" -> Mono packages allowed from now on in FE5. If certain people don't feel comfortable submitting or reviewing said packages, that is up to them. Mono in FE4 -- revisit after release of FC5 P.S.: I plan to post this shortlogs in the future after every meeting. Remind me if I let it slip. -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- 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 Thu Jan 26 21:04:54 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:04:54 -0600 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> (Thorsten Leemhuis's message of "Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:55:19 +0100") References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: >>>>> "TL" == Thorsten Leemhuis writes: TL> The Agenda, often with links to some more detailed background on TL> the topics http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule When an agenda item says "Somebody needs to...", can that somebody come from outside the committee? I would like to see action on the security proposal (since I brought it up in the first place) but I got the impression that it is in the hands of the committee now and that I should just wait to see what is decided. Is there any way I can participate? - J< From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Thu Jan 26 21:51:45 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:51:45 +0100 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "TL" == Thorsten Leemhuis writes: > > TL> The Agenda, often with links to some more detailed background on > TL> the topics http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule > > When an agenda item says "Somebody needs to...", can that somebody > come from outside the committee? I would like to see action on the > security proposal (since I brought it up in the first place) but I got > the impression that it is in the hands of the committee now and that I > should just wait to see what is decided. Is there any way I can > participate? > I would like to participate as well, can we get some movement/action with regards to the security proposal? I wrote most of the current http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SecurityPolicy page BTW why has this been moved down the list, it used to be quite high on the schedule list. Is it an idea to discuss this the next fesco meeting and that I and Jason join that part of the fesco meeting? Regards, Hans From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Jan 26 22:28:30 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:28:30 +0000 Subject: Review please... Message-ID: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, Now that Mono apps can be taken into FE, would some kind soul who understands how Mono operates please review the following packages for inclusion? 177512 mysql-connector-net 178900 monodoc 178901 gtksourceview-sharp 178903 ikvm 178904 Monodevelop TTFN Paul -- "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters -------------- 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 kevin.kofler at chello.at Thu Jan 26 22:45:29 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:45:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: iscan license question References: <20060123223130.GA24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138055769.2583.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123224826.GB24560@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> <1138056865.2583.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060123234414.GA22595@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: > > > > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause. > > > Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including only > > > the binary parts. > > > > That seems like the best plan of action. > > Would be, if iscan could be packaged that way. Unfortunately, it still requires > a non-free, binary-only library libesmod.so.1. So, is it OK to package that > library even if we don't have its source? IMHO, this would blatantly violate Fedora Extras guidelines. Why don't you just package the whole thing for Livna or somewhere else? I doubt it would be usable without the binary stuff anyway, so what's the point of putting unusable libs into Extras? From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 22:49:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:49:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 168580] Review Request: perl-Crypt-DES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601262249.k0QMnwET018845@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DES https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168580 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-26 17:49 EST ------- This one's nearly ready to go, and is a dep of some other packages just imported into CVS; I'm just waiting on responses to comment #2 ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 22:56:44 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:56:44 +0200 Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <1138291897.2638.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <65205.192.54.193.25.1138288567.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138291897.2638.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138316204.17116.20.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 17:11 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 16:16 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > > (printing a diff of the result would be helpful so you can do a final > > check before make plague) > > Before commit would be better. Not quite the same, but if one has the previous source rpm available, fedora-diffarchive from fedora-rpmdevtools can be useful. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 26 22:53:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:53:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178905] Review Request: smbldap-tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601262253.k0QMrBC6019265@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smbldap-tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178905 steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |steve at silug.org ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-01-26 17:53 EST ------- Suggestions for /etc/smbldap_tools/smbldap.conf: 1) Undefine SID so it is fetched with "net getlocalsid". 2) Undefine sambaDomain so it is fetched from smb.conf. 3) TLS keys should go in /etc/pki/? 4) usersdn should be "ou=People,${suffix}" to match OpenLDAP migration tools. 5) groupsdn should be "ou=Group,${suffix}" to match OpenLDAP migration tools. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 26 22:56:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:56:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178604] Review Request: ruby-mysql In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601262256.k0QMupcU019767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mysql https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178604 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-26 17:56 EST ------- -Fix the changelog (you'll have to make a 2.7-4) -I'd package this in the Development/Languages group (php-mysql is) -use "make %{?_smp_mflags}" under %build rpmlint output: W: ruby-mysql incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.7-1 2.7-3 non-blocker: I think removing the summary from %description might clean it up a bit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 00:26:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:26:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179040] Review Request: socat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601270026.k0R0QxG9030632@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From somlo at cmu.edu 2006-01-26 19:26 EST ------- Summary and %description should both start with a capital letter > %setup -q -n "%{name}-%{mversion}" use '%setup -q' and get rid of %{mversion} > export DESTDIR=%{buildroot} > %{__make} DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install The 'export DESTDIR' line is redundant, unless you have a broken makefile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From orion at cora.nwra.com Fri Jan 27 00:50:26 2006 From: orion at cora.nwra.com (Orion Poplawski) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:50:26 -0700 Subject: Replacing LAM with OpenMPI in Fedora Core In-Reply-To: <1136491078.20505.115.camel@ernie> References: <1136226300.30006.345.camel@ernie> <1136491078.20505.115.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <43D96E52.9080203@cora.nwra.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ed Hill wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 11:59 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Ed Hill wrote: >>> I understand that OpenMPI is supposed to [at least, for some people's >>> perception! ;-)] become the "one true MPI" implementation that eclipses >>> all others due to its very cool new modular design and other features. >>> But, even so, I think it would be a good idea to have and maintain other >>> MPI versions (such as MPICH v1 & v2, LAM, etc.) in Extras so that people >>> have some flexibility. And to do that, we'll very likely need to setup >>> the multiple MPI packages using alternatives. >> >> While we are thinking about this, it would be good to be able to support >> multiple versions of a particular MPI compiled with different compilers. >> Locally I maintain LAM compiled with PGF90 and IFORT and it would be >> nice to be able to have all three installed simultaneously. > > Hi Orion, > > Yes, we also have groups of machines where we maintain combinations of > compilers, MPI libs, etc.: > > MPI: LAM, mpich, mpich-vmi, etc. > Compilers: GNU (multiple versions), Intel, PGI, etc. > > and we do it with an install framework that looks something like: > > /opt/pkg/${PKG_NAME} and/or /usr/local/pkg/${PKG_NAME} > > and then let users dynamically chose which packages or combinations of > packages to use with the environment modules scripts: > > http://modules.sourceforge.net/ > > I like the above setup because: > > + its quite flexible and can handle dependencies between > the packages pretty gracefully > + it can be made to work (play nicely!) with the in-Core MPI > setup and/or any number of additional MPI setups which > might be installed (perhas someday?) through Fedora Extras > or local installs > + its an increasingly popular arrangement for scientific and > high-performance computing systems > > I'd like to see as much of the above as possible included in Fedora > Extras and [given what little free time I have! :-)] I'm doing what I > can to try and get the necessary parts packaged, etc. I have a modules > package in progress and will be glad to share my unfinished bits with > anyone who is interested. > > Do you have any objections to the above or maybe suggestions for > improvements? > > Ed > I've been poking around a bit with this using alternatives, and I've think I've reached a dead end with that approach. It's okay for a couple binaries and man pages, but it quickly gets unwieldy with collections of shared libraries and sets of API man pages. Also, alternatives works reasonably well for *system* wide defaults. Less well for per user defaults. I've submitted the modules system for Extras for use there. So, what are the restrictions in Fedora as to where we can install things? In particular, I think we may need to install most of the binaries somewhere other than /usr/bin, and we *definitely* need the man3 pages somewhere other than /usr/share/man/man3 (and maybe the rest as well). How to we switch default paths between different bin and man directories? Entries in /etc/profile.d managed via alternatives? Some bugs tracking this discussion: Bug 178967 ? Future of lam - use alternatives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178967 Bug 173719 ? Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 Bug 171993 ? Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 - - Orion -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD2W5RORnzrtFC2/sRAvDpAJwLTjdtmiKU4iZSTa1LUSNzI8I+NQCfRffM lFHmzvw3LTP5N6YMdTH+61U= =0Vu5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 01:09:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:09:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179040] Review Request: socat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601270109.k0R19eqA003608@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-26 20:09 EST ------- the mversion is needed because the version is 1.4.3.0 but it untars in socat-1.4/ not socat-1.4.3.0. export removed, captials fixed.... Spec Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/socat/binaries/fedora/4/SRPMS/socat-1.4.3.0-2.src.rpm Description: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Fri Jan 27 05:32:56 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:32:56 +0100 Subject: How to review a package ? Message-ID: <1138339976.2896.6.camel@bureau.maison> If i understand well if i want to become a reviewer i need to be part of the fedorabugs group but who can accept this ? Thanks Eric From sundaram at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 05:35:44 2006 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:05:44 +0530 Subject: How to review a package ? In-Reply-To: <1138339976.2896.6.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1138339976.2896.6.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <43D9B130.3080808@redhat.com> Eric Tanguy wrote: >If i understand well if i want to become a reviewer i need to be part of >the fedorabugs group but who can accept this ? > > > I can and I have done so. Let me know if it works. -- Rahul Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 27 05:41:50 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:41:50 +0100 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1138340510.9459.13.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 22:51 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>> "TL" == Thorsten Leemhuis writes: > > > > TL> The Agenda, often with links to some more detailed background on > > TL> the topics http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule > > > > When an agenda item says "Somebody needs to...", can that somebody > > come from outside the committee? Yes, sure. > I would like to see action on the > > security proposal (since I brought it up in the first place) but I got > > the impression that it is in the hands of the committee now and that I > > should just wait to see what is decided. No, most of us are busy with other stuff. So somebody (from in- or outside FESCo) needs to work out the whole thing in general and the rough details (and if you do a good job you might end up in FESCo eventually). Present it to FESCo (via http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SecurityPolicy ) and send it to this list for a public discussion. After that FESCo will look at it and discuss it in a IRC meeting. Would be good if those that created the proposal would be attending to the meeting. Does that sound like a good plan? That's the way I would like to handle it with other stuff, too. (side note: I plan to write a small "How FESCo works" for the wiki when I find time for it) >[...] > BTW why has this been moved down the list, it used to be quite high on > the schedule list. Nope, I just changed the layout a bit -- in fact it even was moved up a bit in the list. http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule?action=recall&rev=146 http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule?action=recall&rev=147 > Is it an idea to discuss this the next fesco meeting and that I and > Jason join that part of the fesco meeting? As I said working out some details would be a start. Things like "Who does the work" "Who is responsible" "Do we need a mailinglist for it? Or do we need two: one open and one closed list?" "How long should we wait for the maintainer to react until the security team steps up and simply fixes the bug?" There are probably other details that should be defined before we start this for real. Cu thl From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 27 05:44:12 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:44:12 +0100 Subject: Wiki-Update (Was: Re: How to update the package?) In-Reply-To: <1138316204.17116.20.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <20060126092106.5514.qmail@web34606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43D8A056.5090308@city-fan.org> <20060126115727.33b44264.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1138275317.28128.32.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <58278.192.54.193.25.1138278355.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138279837.28128.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <65205.192.54.193.25.1138288567.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1138291897.2638.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138316204.17116.20.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1138340652.9459.16.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 00:56 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 17:11 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 26.01.2006, 16:16 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > > > > (printing a diff of the result would be helpful so you can do a final > > > check before make plague) > > > > Before commit would be better. > > Not quite the same, but if one has the previous source rpm available, > fedora-diffarchive from fedora-rpmdevtools can be useful. Yeah, agreed, that's another way -- but we should tell the packagers about fedora-diffarchive and cvs diff in the wiki. That's not the case ATM ;-) CU thl From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Fri Jan 27 05:44:28 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:44:28 +0100 Subject: How to review a package ? In-Reply-To: <43D9B130.3080808@redhat.com> References: <1138339976.2896.6.camel@bureau.maison> <43D9B130.3080808@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1138340668.2896.8.camel@bureau.maison> Le vendredi 27 janvier 2006 ? 11:05 +0530, Rahul Sundaram a ?crit : > Eric Tanguy wrote: > > >If i understand well if i want to become a reviewer i need to be part of > >the fedorabugs group but who can accept this ? > > > > > > > I can and I have done so. Let me know if it works. > > > -- > Rahul > > Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers > Thanks it works but i still can't assign a bug to myself. Eric From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 09:37:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:37:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176109] Review Request: pytraffic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601270937.k0R9bCQf008035@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt.be 2006-01-27 04:37 EST ------- >I can't sponsor, unfortunately. Too bad... I hope somebody picks it up. I get lots of positive comments about pytraffic from people who like the puzzle game Rush Hour. I thought about putting the themes in a noarch package but it seems you cannot make an arch and a noarch package from the same spec file... Splitting the spec files seems inconvenient for now. I made a new version of the spec file since I found out that the installer should not strip binaries (rpm does this automatically). http://alpha.uhasselt.be/Research/Algebra/Members/pytraffic/pytraffic.spec http://alpha.uhasselt.be/Research/Algebra/Members/pytraffic/pytraffic-2.5.4-3.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 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Fri Jan 27 10:03:44 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:03:44 +0100 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: <1138340510.9459.13.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> <1138340510.9459.13.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <43D9F000.6090407@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >> I would like to see action on the >>> security proposal (since I brought it up in the first place) but I got >>> the impression that it is in the hands of the committee now and that I >>> should just wait to see what is decided. > > No, most of us are busy with other stuff. So somebody (from in- or > outside FESCo) needs to work out the whole thing in general and the > rough details (and if you do a good job you might end up in FESCo > eventually). Present it to FESCo (via > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SecurityPolicy ) and > send it to this list for a public discussion. > Jason, shall we team up and try to write a SecurityPolicy proposal? Ifso lets discuss this further by private mail. Thorsten, are there any examples / templates for policy's. (I'm looking for the form of the document here not the content) Regards, Hans From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 27 10:26:22 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:26:22 +0100 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: <43D9F000.6090407@hhs.nl> References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> <1138340510.9459.13.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <43D9F000.6090407@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1138357582.9459.78.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 11:03 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >> I would like to see action on the > >>> security proposal (since I brought it up in the first place) but I got > >>> the impression that it is in the hands of the committee now and that I > >>> should just wait to see what is decided. > > > > No, most of us are busy with other stuff. So somebody (from in- or > > outside FESCo) needs to work out the whole thing in general and the > > rough details (and if you do a good job you might end up in FESCo > > eventually). Present it to FESCo (via > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SecurityPolicy ) and > > send it to this list for a public discussion. > > Jason, shall we team up and try to write a SecurityPolicy proposal? Ifso > lets discuss this further by private mail. > > Thorsten, are there any examples / templates for policy's. (I'm looking > for the form of the document here not the content) Template: Not that I'm aware of -- And I suspect that a template wouldn't work because every situation requires a different scheme. Just writing down everything that seems important or needs to be discussed and presenting it in a sorted manner should be enough. Example: The kernel-module proposal. But that was a bit to long (but maybe that was needed in that case). CU thl From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 10:34:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:34:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271034.k0RAYe7Y015056@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-27 05:34 EST ------- I repeat that I like initng. By trying it I have now a much clearer view on the boot process of Fedora. >> - some bugs (e.g. sometimes stopping a daemon does not seem to work if it >> dependent on a service in the same file); > >Could you post a bug about this (with all relevant information) in initng bz? It >doesn't sound like a hard fix to me... I will try but first I need to install 0.5.3. Or would svn be better? >> - sometimes sound devices are not created, this is clearly a udevd issue; >Udev scripts are being heavily worked on. Let's hope this gets fixed. Filing a >bug might help too. The problem that it only happens occasionally so it seems like a timing issue. Calling udevstart at the end of system/alsasound/loadmodules forces the devices to be created but adds 2 seconds to the boottime (as it also checks all other devices). Again I will need to install 0.5.3 before filing a proper bug report. >> - booting hung while starting the daemon udev/udevd hung because udevd does not >> recognize the --daemon argument (easily fixable); > >Are you sure about this? According to udevd manpage udevd _has_ a daemon >argument. Not on my system! Perhaps you are running rawhide? I am running FC4 with the latest updates but little else. >> - often console switches to cyrillic for a while (ugly); > >I've been trying to fix this, but it didn't get any better. Check comment #84 >above. If anyone can help me out here I would be very glad... I also have no idea what could possibly cause this. Disabling gdm, consolefont, and keymaps did not fix it.... >> - console flashes (ugly); > >Flashes? Could you elaborate? The console turns black and then it comes back up. >> - no integration yet with rhgb (easily fixable I presume). > >Blah. Do we really need rhgb when running initng? I think we do (but it is of course not a show stopper). Many people do like the cleanliness of a WinXP or Mac/OSX boot. On a desktop system users should not see *any* bootmessages (even rhgb is too noisy for my taste). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 11:42:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:42:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176467] Review Request: alltray: Dock any application in the tray In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271142.k0RBgsPn026147@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alltray: Dock any application in the tray https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176467 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-27 06:42 EST ------- Finally got it to build 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 Fri Jan 27 11:53:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 06:53:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271153.k0RBrVHT027661@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-27 06:53 EST ------- >> - Shouldn't smart-usermode obsolete smart-update and not ksmarttray? I >> might be wrong but if you just read the decriptions you get that impression. > Other ksmarttray packages are linked against smart-update, so doing what you > suggest could cause conflicts. Obsoleting it in ksmarttray doesn't have that > problem. Are linked against? Do you mean that other ksmarttray packages require smart-update? In that case I don't understand your reasoning because I think smart-usermode replaces smart-update in this spec. (And doesn't replacing mean obsoleting?) If you mean other ksmarttray packages provide smart-update, you forget that they also provide ksmarttray. Obsoleting smart-update in smart-usermode doesn't mean ksmarttray would be removed if the user has ksmarttray installed. Our ksmarttay will replace the old ksmarttray. The only situation I can think of where this would actually cause conflicts would be a one where the user tries to take ksmarttray and smart-update/smart-usermode from different repositories. And even then the conflict would happen only if the user would try to take the same version of those packages from different repositories. Even if such a conflict would happen you forget that fedora-extras doesn't (and shouldn't) have to support third party repositories like that. The third parties should remove smart from their repos when fedora-extras starts providing 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 ndbecker2 at gmail.com Fri Jan 27 12:07:19 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 07:07:19 -0500 Subject: roundup-1.0 Message-ID: I see roundup 1.0 released today, FYI. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 12:21:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 07:21:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271221.k0RCLmUS031459@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-27 07:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #181) > >> - some bugs (e.g. sometimes stopping a daemon does not seem to work if it > >> dependent on a service in the same file); > > > >Could you post a bug about this (with all relevant information) in initng bz? It > >doesn't sound like a hard fix to me... > > I will try but first I need to install 0.5.3. Or would svn be better? I think 0.5.3 is good. I haven't seen any big changes in that area since 0.5.3... > >> - sometimes sound devices are not created, this is clearly a udevd issue; > > >Udev scripts are being heavily worked on. Let's hope this gets fixed. Filing a > >bug might help too. > > The problem that it only happens occasionally so it seems like a timing issue. > Calling udevstart at the end of system/alsasound/loadmodules forces the devices > to be created but adds 2 seconds to the boottime (as it also checks all other > devices). Again I will need to install 0.5.3 before filing a proper bug report. I've also experienced strange timing problems involving udev. Someone promised me they were gone, but obviously not. Does it make any difference simply inserting a "sleep 10" at the beginning of system/alsasound/loadmodules? > >> - booting hung while starting the daemon udev/udevd hung because udevd does not > >> recognize the --daemon argument (easily fixable); > > > >Are you sure about this? According to udevd manpage udevd _has_ a daemon >argument. > > Not on my system! Perhaps you are running rawhide? I am running FC4 with the > latest updates but little else. Hmmm... After a closer look that particular argument doesn't exist anymore in 0.5.3. Just upgrade and be happy... > >> - console flashes (ugly); > > > >Flashes? Could you elaborate? > > The console turns black and then it comes back up. Strangeness. Haven't ever seen this one. Sounds like it tried to switch to another tty or something? > >> - no integration yet with rhgb (easily fixable I presume). > > > >Blah. Do we really need rhgb when running initng? > > I think we do (but it is of course not a show stopper). Many people do like the > cleanliness of a WinXP or Mac/OSX boot. On a desktop system users should not > see *any* bootmessages (even rhgb is too noisy for my taste). Ok. I guess the best way to do this would be a plugin. All output on the screen comes from a plugin named cpout (colorprintout). I don't think it would be a really big deal (for someone custom with rhgb) to make a rhgb output plugin which instead sends information to rhgb. I guess big question is what would be showed. Since multiple services/daemons are starting at the same time I guess rhgb would have to be extended? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 14:04:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:04:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178905] Review Request: smbldap-tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271404.k0RE4CGG014447@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smbldap-tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178905 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-27 09:04 EST ------- All suggestions from comment #2 incorporated into new version: New SRPM: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/smbldap-tools/smbldap-tools-0.9.2-2.src.rpm Spec URL remains unchanged. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 14:34:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:34:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172343] Review Request: libtomoe-gtk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271434.k0REYkS5019521@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-27 09:34 EST ------- How annoying, the sourceforge link doesn't download automatically. md5sum checks manually though. Good: - rpmlint only notices that ldconfig in spec is a one line script. Can ignore, or use the -p option (wiki: ScriptletSnippets). - 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 FC4 i386 - 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 - devel package ok - no .la files - devel requires base package n-v-r Missing ldconfig for the devel package, which I believe is needed. Looks good otherwise. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Fri Jan 27 14:41:29 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:41:29 -0600 Subject: Shortlog from todays fesco meeting In-Reply-To: <43D9F000.6090407@hhs.nl> (Hans de Goede's message of "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:03:44 +0100") References: <1138308919.2638.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43D94471.4030804@hhs.nl> <1138340510.9459.13.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <43D9F000.6090407@hhs.nl> Message-ID: >>>>> "HdG" == Hans de Goede writes: HdG> Jason, shall we team up and try to write a SecurityPolicy HdG> proposal? Ifso lets discuss this further by private mail. Yes, I think that would be best. If anyone else is interested, please let us know. Hans, I'll contact you privately. - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 14:51:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:51:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169345] Review Request: SEC - Simple Event Correlator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271451.k0REpk5t022214@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-27 09:51 EST ------- Can't find any other Extras work from you, need sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 15:04:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:04:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 169345] Review Request: SEC - Simple Event Correlator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271504.k0RF4rag024484@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From Didier.Moens at dmbr.UGent.be 2006-01-27 10:04 EST ------- My apologies, John, as I have been swamped with work lately ; I don't like bitrot either. SEC has a quite stable release scheme, and no new versions have been released in the interim. I'll take this (sponsor, rpmlint-ing, etc.) up ASAP (probably early february) ; thanks for your 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 Jan 27 15:09:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:09:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175237] Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271509.k0RF9qNn025647@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bzr - bazaar-ng distributed revision control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175237 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-01-27 10:09 EST ------- The -2 package builds and works for me now (at least for a quick test), thanks! Getting a copy of the GPL into the tarball was just a suggestion to bring to the upstream developers, as was the non-English description. 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 Jan 27 15:17:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:17:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172343] Review Request: libtomoe-gtk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271517.k0RFHnNd027110@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-27 10:17 EST ------- Thank you for reviewing. I've fixed the following problems. 1. The sourcefiles is not downloaded automatically. 2. You must use "-p" int the "post" and "postun" sections. SRPM: http://proxy.f2.ymdb.yahoofs.jp/users/d1e4801f/bc/libtomoe-gtk/libtomoe-gtk-0.1.0-4.src.rpm?bcR5j2DBDHKQ6EjA SPEC: http://proxy.f2.ymdb.yahoofs.jp/users/d1e4801f/bc/libtomoe-gtk/libtomoe-gtk.spec?bcR5j2DBlYt9kUIe -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 15:43:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:43:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173653] Review Request: xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271543.k0RFhd3e000309@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-quicklauncher-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173653 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-27 10:43 EST ------- + tarball from source rpm matches tarball from url listed on SPEC files. Validated by both md5 and sha1 + SPEC files conforms to PackagingGuildeline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines + name of package follows PackageNameGuidelines standard http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + rpmlint is clean. No major error. Apparently, using "%__chmod 0664 {AUTHORS,COPYING}" should not be a problem. + mock succesfully build the source package + No major incident during install and removal of the package Accordingly, the package is ready to be submitted on Fedora Extras. Set to FC-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 Christian.Iseli at licr.org Fri Jan 27 16:07:02 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:07:02 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages Message-ID: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi all, I whipped up a small Perl script to analyze FE-ACCEPT'ed packages. Here are the raw conclusions so far: --- We have 18 accepted, closed packages where I'm unable to find the package in the development repo: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165488,168185,171601,172136,172144,172150,172151,173216,173548,173549,173550,173552,173553,173661,174266,175848,176467,177083 We have 434 accepted, closed package reviews Top 10 packagers: tcallawa at redhat dot com : 43 rc040203 at freenet dot de : 41 andreas dot bierfert at lowlatency.de : 28 jpo at di dot uminho.pt : 22 fedora dot wickert at arcor.de : 18 rdieter at math dot unl.edu : 14 orion at cora dot nwra.com : 13 pertusus at free dot fr : 13 paul at city-fan dot org : 11 ivazquez at ivazquez dot net : 11 Top 10 reviewers: paul at city-fan dot org : 62 gauret at free dot fr : 58 gdk at redhat dot com : 33 tcallawa at redhat dot com : 24 jpmahowald at gmail dot com : 24 rc040203 at freenet dot de : 22 jpo at di dot uminho.pt : 19 adrian at lisas dot de : 18 ed at eh3 dot com : 18 ville dot skytta at iki.fi : 13 We have 9 accepted, open package reviews where the package appears to already be in the repo... All open packages already available: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=166207,166251,166252,166253,166254,168905,171334,171336,177166 --- I suspect gdk's good score as a reviewer stems from the fact that some reviewers forget to assign the bugs to themselves... If people could have a quick look at the bug lists and: - close the tickets where teh package is available in the repo - ponder why their package is not in the devel repo in the other cases I guess that'd be nice :-) Cheers, Christian P.S. I'm happy to put my (very blunt) script somewhere, but I'm not sure where would be the most appropriate... From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Fri Jan 27 16:41:33 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:41:33 -0800 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> (Christian's message of "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:07:02 +0100") References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <2dpsmdpqrm.fsf@allele2.biol.berkeley.edu> [...] -> P.S. I'm happy to put my (very blunt) script somewhere, but I'm not -> sure where would be the most appropriate... How about right here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts Alex From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 16:37:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:37:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271637.k0RGbFEa011855@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-27 11:36 EST ------- I had a look at the initng.spec file in cvs but it is not up to date. The Source0 refers to v0.4. Which spec file should I use? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 16:42:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:42:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271642.k0RGgvpi013415@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-27 11:42 EST ------- * File list: some files were listed multiple times (wiki: PackageReviewGuidelines) Seems the *.so files are also listed with the %dir line. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 17:25:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:25:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167943] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271725.k0RHPR1L022014@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167943 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info 2006-01-27 12:25 EST ------- Mark, do have a sponsor already? Is this the only packager currently under review for 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 Fri Jan 27 17:41:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:41:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167943] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271741.k0RHfVMQ026028@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167943 ------- Additional Comments From hamzy at us.ibm.com 2006-01-27 12:41 EST ------- Hi Thorsten, I do not think so. Perhaps Jason might be?? I have been working with him in the past for these packages. I am starting with the sblim-cmpi-base, sblim-testsuite, and sblim-wbemcli. If those are accepted, then I will be added more later. The spec files and source RPMS are located under http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=128809 for the respective packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Fri Jan 27 18:30:14 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:30:14 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <43DA66B6.7090908@hhs.nl> Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > Hi all, > > I whipped up a small Perl script to analyze FE-ACCEPT'ed packages. Here are > the raw conclusions so far: > > --- > We have 18 accepted, closed packages where I'm unable to find > the package in the development repo: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165488,168185,171601,172136,172144,172150,172151,173216,173548,173549,173550,173552,173553,173661,174266,175848,176467,177083 > In case of 174366 this package has been removed because it is in core now. Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 18:14:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:14:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178604] Review Request: ruby-mysql In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271814.k0RIEpg5031810@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-mysql https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178604 ------- Additional Comments From oliver.andrich at gmail.com 2006-01-27 13:14 EST ------- Fixed the above mentioned things. Spec Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://roughbook.de/fedora/ruby-mysql-2.7-4.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 Fri Jan 27 18:49:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:49:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173653] Review Request: xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271849.k0RInEY9006407@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-quicklauncher-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173653 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-27 13:49 EST ------- Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. 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 Jan 27 19:30:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:30:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175502] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Spell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601271930.k0RJUVLZ016431@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org 2006-01-27 14:30 EST ------- Good: All of the above and no more rpmlint warnings TODOs: - perl is not needed as a BuildRequires - ditch the %realname macro Fixup those two remaining issues and I think this is ready for approval -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 27 19:38:14 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:38:14 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:30:14 +0100." <43DA66B6.7090908@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <200601272039.k0RKcxvo030360@mx2.redhat.com> j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl said: > In case of 174366 this package has been removed because it is in core now. Right. Sorry, I took the core package list from FC5t2 instead of rawhide... Cheers, Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 20:14:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:14:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174265] Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272014.k0RKE17V026079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itcl - Object oriented extension to Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174265 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-27 15:13 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > * File list: some files were listed multiple times > (wiki: PackageReviewGuidelines) > > Seems the *.so files are also listed with the %dir line. Fixed: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl.spec http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/itcl-3.3-0.3.RC1.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 Christian.Iseli at licr.org Fri Jan 27 20:20:13 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:20:13 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:41:33 PST." <2dpsmdpqrm.fsf@allele2.biol.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: <200601272020.k0RKKESD007105@mx1.redhat.com> alexl at users.sourceforge.net said: > How about right here: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsefulScripts Ok. Done, along with some explanations. My plan is to extend the script to also analyze FE-REVIEW and FE-NEW tickets. Ideas and/or code welcome :-) Cheers, Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 20:19:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:19:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272019.k0RKJYgb027783@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-27 15:19 EST ------- the attached patch should fix the selinux issues. please test and write feedback. I have some alsasound issue that lets initng hang at boot (0.5.3) will try to resolve them and test the patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 20:31:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:31:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272031.k0RKV9Bp029637@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-27 15:30 EST ------- ok the problem was theat alsasound has a need = system/boodmisc but it should be system/bootmisc after solving that I tryed booting and it hangs after system is starting up (selinux policy was loaded) seems like that the rexec code is broken. can somebody review 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 jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu Fri Jan 27 21:43:29 2006 From: jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu (Jack Neely) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:43:29 -0500 Subject: Kernel module experiments Message-ID: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Folks, I'm continuing to poke at the kernel modules proposal to the point where I can update my kernel-module code in yum with a proper module. I have several questions. 1) I have kmodtool 0.10.3, where is kmodtool kept in CVS? 2) Creating kmod-openafs-smp it requires kernel-smp-i686. The kernel-smp prackage provides kernel-i686 and kernel-smp but not the above. This is the current rawhide kernel I'm building against. What's the plan here? I haven't seen kernel-- used before. Jack -- Jack Neely Campus Linux Services Project Lead PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 21:58:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:58:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272158.k0RLw5dg017981@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com 2006-01-27 16:58 EST ------- Sorry real life caught up with me this week. I'll be looking at finishing this review up this weekend. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Fri Jan 27 22:38:32 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:38:32 -0500 Subject: Kernel module experiments In-Reply-To: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <1138401512.20556.7.camel@ignacio.lan> On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 16:43 -0500, Jack Neely wrote: > 2) Creating kmod-openafs-smp it requires kernel-smp-i686. The > kernel-smp prackage provides kernel-i686 and kernel-smp but not the > above. This is the current rawhide kernel I'm building against. What's > the plan here? I haven't seen kernel-- used before. $ rpm -qp --provides .../kernel-smp-2.6.15-1.1878_FC5.i686.rpm kernel = 2.6.15 kernel-drm = 4.3.0 kernel-i686 = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5smp kernel-smp = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5 $ rpm -qp --provides .../kernel-smp-2.6.15-1.1878_FC5.ppc.rpm kernel = 2.6.15 kernel-drm = 4.3.0 kernel-ppc = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5smp kernel-smp = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5 Definitely looks broken to me. Although IMO the package should provide kernel--, even though yum should only grab the proper arch. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 27 22:59:48 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:59:48 -0500 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> On 1/26/06, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > Is there any reason why the latest updates of rdiff-backup where not > issued for FC3? This way, I can no longer use it to backup between my > laptop (FC3) and server (FC4). > > I just verified that the current srpm package for FC4 > (rdiff-backup-1.0.1-1.fc4.src.rpm) builds and works correctly also in > FC3, so I think it would be just a matter of adding it to the build > queue... FC3 has entered maintainence mode with the release of FC5test2. There is no policy for Fedora Extras that requires maintainers to supply packages for Core releases that have entered maintainence mode. If the original maintainer doesn't want the burden of keeping FC3 updated now that its in maintainence mode, another maintainer may need to express interest in supplying those updates. -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 27 23:15:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:15:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176452] Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272315.k0RNFPSU031904@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: oddjob - a D-BUS service which runs odd jobs on behalf of client applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176452 ------- Additional Comments From nalin at redhat.com 2006-01-27 18:15 EST ------- No worries. I've been tweaking the build setup and code so that they'll build with the version of dbus in FC3 and RHEL4 if a certain piece of SELinux-specific functionality which I really, really want gets backported. I'll have 0.23 up in the usual places soonish. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 27 23:59:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:59:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173660] Review Request: xfce4-diskperf-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601272359.k0RNxuLR005601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-diskperf-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173660 luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From luya_tfz at thefinalzone.com 2006-01-27 18:59 EST ------- + Tarball from SRPM matches tarball from url listed on SPEC file. Both valided by md5sum and sha1sum + mock succesfully builds the SRPM + rpmlint did not report a warning or an error + spec files conform to PackagingGuideline http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines + name of the package conforms to PackageNamingGuideline http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines + No error or bug reported with installation and removal of the binary package Accordingly, the package is ready to be ported on Fedora Extras repository. Set to FE-ACCEPT status. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 00:29:05 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:29:05 +0000 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> Hi > Now that Mono apps can be taken into FE, would some kind soul who > understands how Mono operates please review the following packages for > inclusion? > > 177512 mysql-connector-net > 178900 monodoc > 178901 gtksourceview-sharp > 178903 ikvm > 178904 Monodevelop Ah come on, someone must want to review them. Please... TTFN Paul -- "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters From imlinux at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 01:06:51 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Michael McGrath) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:06:51 -0600 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> On 1/27/06, Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi > > > Now that Mono apps can be taken into FE, would some kind soul who > > understands how Mono operates please review the following packages for > > inclusion? > > > > 177512 mysql-connector-net > > 178900 monodoc > > 178901 gtksourceview-sharp > > 178903 ikvm > > 178904 Monodevelop > > Ah come on, someone must want to review them. Please... > > TTFN > > Paul > -- > "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters I'd do it but I honestly know NOTHING about mono, I have a feeling I'm not alone..... -Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 01:12:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:12:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173660] Review Request: xfce4-diskperf-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601280112.k0S1ChGk015239@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-diskperf-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173660 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-27 20:12 EST ------- 3382 (xfce4-diskperf-plugin): Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/3382-xfce4-diskperf-plugin-1.5-4.fc5/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 01:40:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:40:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179202] New: Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter-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=179202 Summary: Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter-plugin Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: fedora.wickert at arcor.de QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras-review/SPECS/xfce4-screenshooter-plugin.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras-review/SRPMS/xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.fc4.src.rpm Description: Screenshot utility for the Xfce panel The Screenshooter plugin allows you to take screenshots from the Xfce panel. Comments: License BSD (without advertising clause) rpmlint is fine builds in mock on core 4 Now after all the xfce-goodies finished their reviews I want to bore you with another 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 christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de Sat Jan 28 03:01:40 2006 From: christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:01:40 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 17:07 +0100 schrieb Christian.Iseli at licr.org: > Hi all, > > We have 18 accepted, closed packages where I'm unable to find > the package in the development repo: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165488,168185,171601,172136,172144,172150,172151,173216,173548,173549,173550,173552,173553,173661,174266,175848,176467,177083 > 173549 xfce4-mount-plugin needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 07:47:17 173550 xfce4-netload-plugin needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 09:07:29 173552 xfce4-sensors-plugin needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 07:26:16 173553 xfce4-websearch-plugin needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 07:48:03 173661 xfce4-fsguard-plugin needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 08:47:59 175848 xfce4-taskmanager needsign/success 26 Jan 2006 07:27:27 So all these packages should hit the devel repo any moment. Rawhide was inconsistent when I build the core 3 & 4 packages, for most of the packages this is mentioned in the bugreport. 173548 xfce4-modemlights-plugin is where I really need help. I'm having problems with buildreqs for modular X. All the buildlog says is: ... checking for locales directory... /usr/share/locale checking for additional xgettext flags... --keyword=Q_ checking for X... no configure: error: X Window system libraries and header files are required I don't have a rawhide box here... I tried libX11-devel, xorg-x11-proto-devel but no success. > We have 434 accepted, closed package reviews > > Top 10 packagers: > tcallawa at redhat dot com : 43 > rc040203 at freenet dot de : 41 > andreas dot bierfert at lowlatency.de : 28 > jpo at di dot uminho.pt : 22 > fedora dot wickert at arcor.de : 18 wow, I'm a Top 10 packager ;) although all my packages taken together are < 5 MB I guess. Christoph From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Sat Jan 28 03:09:47 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:09:47 -0500 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1138417787.20556.16.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > I don't have a rawhide box here... I tried libX11-devel, > xorg-x11-proto-devel but no success. That's what mock is for. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Sat Jan 28 03:23:48 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:23:48 -0500 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1138418628.20556.19.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > ... > checking for locales directory... /usr/share/locale > checking for additional xgettext flags... --keyword=Q_ > checking for X... no > configure: error: X Window system libraries and header files are > required configure:22230: checking for X configure:22336: gcc -E conftest.c conftest.c:34:27: error: X11/Intrinsic.h: No such file or directory configure:22342: $? = 1 -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de Sat Jan 28 03:35:46 2006 From: christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:35:46 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138417787.20556.16.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1138417787.20556.16.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1138419347.6182.61.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 22:09 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: > On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > I don't have a rawhide box here... I tried libX11-devel, > > xorg-x11-proto-devel but no success. > > That's what mock is for. > Yes. I know that I can change the mock config to devel, but... mock builds from a srpm. How do I build this srpm with builddeps to packages that are not available in core 4? (Maybe this is a stupid question...) Christoph From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 03:38:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:38:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178951] Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601280338.k0S3ccGR001067@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: modules - Provides dynamic modification of a user's environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178951 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ed at eh3.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-27 22:38 EST ------- Hi Orion, I really don't know what to say in regards to the default initialization of modules. Some may view it as helpful while others may think its an annoyance. Since you're packaging it, I think you should get some leeway in deciding whats appropriate. And heres a quick review: good: + source matches upstream + specfile is legible and looks sane + license is correct (GPL) according to the upstream web site but no license is included in the source + builds in mock on FC4 + permissions and dir ownership look OK + code not content nits: - Why the "--disable-versioning" flag? IMHO, its a pretty cool and useful feature. - Please consider naming the package "environment-modules" instead of just "modules" since it is the upstream project name (the "Environment Modules Project") and its a lot less ambiguous. The name "modules" gets used for all sorts of stuff including kernel modules and perhaps a more descriptive name can help avoid some confusion for new users? Its just a suggestion, though. - rpmlint reports: E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/tcsh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/bash W: modules hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/Modules/init/.modulespath E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/.modulespath E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/csh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/zsh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/python E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/perl E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/sh E: modules script-without-shellbang /usr/share/Modules/init/ksh but I agree that these can probably be safely ignored - Please consider either adding the paper: http://modules.sourceforge.net/docs/MC2_whitney_paper.pdf to the documentation or adding a brief REAME-style link to the homepage and the paper since its very helpful and well- written document. Exactly the sort of thing new users should read! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 28 03:48:17 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:48:17 -0500 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138419347.6182.61.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1138417787.20556.16.camel@ignacio.lan> <1138419347.6182.61.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1138420098.20556.20.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:35 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 22:09 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: > > On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > I don't have a rawhide box here... I tried libX11-devel, > > > xorg-x11-proto-devel but no success. > > > > That's what mock is for. > > > > Yes. I know that I can change the mock config to devel, but... > > mock builds from a srpm. How do I build this srpm with builddeps to > packages that are not available in core 4? > > (Maybe this is a stupid question...) You examine config.log et al in the mock buildroot in order to figure out what packages are required. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 04:07:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:07:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177038] Review Request: perl-version: Perl extension for Version Objects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601280407.k0S470L9006157@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-version: Perl extension for Version Objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177038 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-27 23:06 EST ------- Tom, I have just placed new build requests as the previous ones - 2764, 2765, 2766 - had failed (the required Module::Build version wasn't available at the time). jpo PS - This module could also be updated to version 0.53 Diff from version-0.51 to version-0.53 http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=version-0.51&to=version-0.53 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de Sat Jan 28 04:54:55 2006 From: christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:54:55 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138418628.20556.19.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1138418628.20556.19.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1138424095.6182.70.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 22:23 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: > On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > ... > > checking for locales directory... /usr/share/locale > > checking for additional xgettext flags... --keyword=Q_ > > checking for X... no > > configure: error: X Window system libraries and header files are > > required > > configure:22230: checking for X > configure:22336: gcc -E conftest.c > conftest.c:34:27: error: X11/Intrinsic.h: No such file or directory > configure:22342: $? = 1 > Thx, that's libXt-devel. replacing libX11 did the trick. Now that all my xfce packages are build, I've just send a new review request for xfce4-screenshooter-plugin (179202). I somebody has some time for this, feel free. Thanks Christoph From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 05:42:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:42:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179202] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601280542.k0S5gcuL017503@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-screenshooter-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179202 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-28 00:42 EST ------- Also builds fine in mock on devel without modifications. http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras-review/SRPMS/xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.fc5.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 paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sat Jan 28 08:03:15 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:03:15 +0000 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1138435395.20046.97.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > > 177512 mysql-connector-net > > > 178900 monodoc > > > 178901 gtksourceview-sharp > > > 178903 ikvm > > > 178904 Monodevelop > > > > Ah come on, someone must want to review them. Please... > I'd do it but I honestly know NOTHING about mono, I have a feeling I'm > not alone..... Looks like I'll need to wait for one of the RH bods to look at them then. In the meantime, can someone at least check the spec files? TTFN Paul -- "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 28 09:38:59 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:38:59 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <1138419347.6182.61.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1138417300.6182.50.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1138417787.20556.16.camel@ignacio.lan> <1138419347.6182.61.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <20060128103859.3ad2a1b9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:35:46 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 27.01.2006, 22:09 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: > > On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 04:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > I don't have a rawhide box here... I tried libX11-devel, > > > xorg-x11-proto-devel but no success. > > > > That's what mock is for. > > > > Yes. I know that I can change the mock config to devel, but... > > mock builds from a srpm. How do I build this srpm with builddeps to > packages that are not available in core 4? > > (Maybe this is a stupid question...) > > Christoph rpmbuild -bs --nodeps foo.spec From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 28 09:44:07 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:44:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060128094407.60AF280EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 13 emelfm2-0.1.5-1.fc3 fortune-firefly-2.1.0-1.fc3 gnupg2-1.9.20-1.fc3 kdocker-1.3-4.fc3 libxml++-2.12.0-2.fc3 perl-Test-Pod-Coverage-1.08-1.fc3 perl-WWW-Mechanize-1.16-1.fc3 perl-version-0.51-3.fc3 rxvt-unicode-7.3a-1.fc3 sbcl-0.9.9-1.fc3 tclhttpd-3.5.1-8.fc3 xfce4-fsguard-plugin-0.2.1-2.fc3 xfce4-netload-plugin-0.3.3-3.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 Sat Jan 28 09:44:37 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:44:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060128094437.7F8B480EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 18 emelfm2-0.1.5-1.fc4 fortune-firefly-2.1.0-1.fc4 gnupg2-1.9.20-1.fc4 kdocker-1.3-4.fc4 libxml++-2.12.0-2.fc4 liferea-1.0.2-1.fc4 nagios-1.3-15.fc4 nagios-2.0-0.1.rc2.fc4 octave-2.1.72-2.fc4 perl-Test-Pod-Coverage-1.08-1.fc4 perl-WWW-Mechanize-1.16-1.fc4 perl-version-0.51-3.fc4 rxvt-unicode-7.3a-1.fc4 sbcl-0.9.9-1.fc4 system-config-control-1.0-5.fc4 tclhttpd-3.5.1-8.fc4 xfce4-fsguard-plugin-0.2.1-2.fc4 xfce4-netload-plugin-0.3.3-3.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 Sat Jan 28 09:45:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:45:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060128094517.24BC680EB@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 38 alltray-0.65-1.fc5 azureus-2.3.0.6-20.fc5 byzanz-0.1.0-1.fc5 byzanz-0.1.0-2.fc5 emelfm2-0.1.5-1.fc5 fortune-firefly-2.1.0-1.fc5 gnupg2-1.9.20-1.fc5 gsview-4.7-5.fc5 gtk-qt-engine-0.60-7.fc5 js-1.5-1.fc5 kdocker-1.3-4.fc5.1 libksba-0.9.13-2.fc5 libxml++-2.12.0-2.fc5 nagios-1.3-15.fc5 nagios-2.0-0.1.rc2.fc5 octave-2.9.4-5.fc5 perl-Config-Tiny-2.04-1.fc5 perl-HTML-Mason-1.32-2.fc5 perl-Net-SSLeay-1.30-2.fc5 perl-Test-Pod-Coverage-1.08-1.fc5 perl-version-0.51-3.fc5 rxvt-unicode-7.3a-1.fc5 sbcl-0.9.9-1.fc5 system-config-control-1.0-4.fc5 system-config-control-1.0-6.fc5 tclhttpd-3.5.1-8.fc5 tidy-0.99.0-9.20051025.fc5 ushare-0.9.5-4.fc5 xfce4-diskperf-plugin-1.5-4.fc5 xfce4-fsguard-plugin-0.2.1-2.fc5 xfce4-modemlights-plugin-0.1.1-5.fc5 xfce4-mount-plugin-0.3.3-1.fc5 xfce4-netload-plugin-0.3.3-3.fc5 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin-0.81-2.fc5 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-3.fc5 xfce4-taskmanager-0.3.1-2.fc5 xfce4-websearch-plugin-0.1.0-4.fc5 yumex-0.99.3-1.0.fc5 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 Sat Jan 28 10:10:46 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:10:46 +0200 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200601271607.k0RG721W029437@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1138443046.18823.15.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 17:07 +0100, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > We have 434 accepted, closed package reviews > > Top 10 packagers: Note that depending on what "Top 10 packagers" means, counting FE-ACCEPTed packages from Bugzilla might not be the right thing to do. Loads of packages in Extras were imported from fedora.us and so don't have any reviews in bugzilla.redhat.com. Counting that metric from owners.list could be better. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 10:11:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:11:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281011.k0SABNdi013206@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-28 05:11 EST ------- Package still missing from the repos, reopening. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 28 11:44:31 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:44:31 +0100 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <1138435395.20046.97.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> <1138435395.20046.97.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1138448672.2851.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 28.01.2006, 08:03 +0000 schrieb Paul F. Johnson: > Hi, > > > > > 177512 mysql-connector-net > > > > 178900 monodoc > > > > 178901 gtksourceview-sharp > > > > 178903 ikvm > > > > 178904 Monodevelop > > > > > > Ah come on, someone must want to review them. Please... > > > I'd do it but I honestly know NOTHING about mono, I have a feeling I'm > > not alone..... > > Looks like I'll need to wait for one of the RH bods to look at them > then. In the meantime, can someone at least check the spec files? It's probably a good idea to gather some informations about special issues around packaging and reviewing software that uses mono. Paul (and other people packaging/reviewing mono stuff), could you collect those informations and put them in http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Mono tia! The page probably should look similar to the Python page found at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python BTW, that page still has: --- Instead of depending on a specific python version, depend on python-abi, which is provided by the install Python interpreter package, like so: [...] Requires: python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]") --- Is this still valid in FC4 and newer? I thought rpm handles that on their own these days. Could someone that knows more details behind this clean up that page? tia! Cu thl BTW: I created a special namespace http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ in the wiki for issues around packaging and moved/will move some pages there. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Jan 28 11:53:06 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:53:06 +0200 Subject: Kernel module experiments In-Reply-To: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> References: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> Message-ID: <1138449186.22192.3.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 16:43 -0500, Jack Neely wrote: > 1) I have kmodtool 0.10.3, where is kmodtool kept in CVS? For now, the lirc-kmod and thinkpad-kmod packages have one. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 12:09:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:09:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281209.k0SC9gTB028017@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-28 07:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #183) > I had a look at the initng.spec file in cvs but it is not up to date. The Source0 > refers to v0.4. Which spec file should I use? The spec file in svn was removed ages ago since it wasn't updated anyway. The spec attached to this bug is always the latest. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 12:21:58 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:21:58 +0000 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <1138448672.2851.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> <1138435395.20046.97.camel@T7.Linux> <1138448672.2851.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138450918.20046.113.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > It's probably a good idea to gather some informations about special > issues around packaging and reviewing software that uses mono. > > Paul (and other people packaging/reviewing mono stuff), could you > collect those informations and put them in > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Mono Probably a good idea. The biggest swine is getting gacutil to work. It took me a while to figure it out... TTFN Paul -- "wir kamen, wir sahen, wir traten ihren Esel" - Dr Venkman, Ghostbusters From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 12:27:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:27:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281227.k0SCRBit030089@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-28 07:26 EST ------- * Sat Jan 28 2006 Enrico Scholz - 0.41-0.6 - renamed '-gtk' subpackage to '-gui-gtk' to please everybody - changed group of 'ksmarttray' to Applications/System - added 'Requires(post): gtk-update-icon-cache' for the -gui-gtk subpackage, but NOT for %postun or the ksmarttray package. It does not matter whether gtk2 exists at uninstallation: when it exists, the cache will be updated; else, the cache is outdated but there is nothing which can use it. To avoid 'gtk2' dependencies in the KDE subpackage, use a %triggerin there for updating the icon-cache and ignore missing programs in %postun silently for the reasons told above already. - added a 'Requires(post): bash' for the main package because a bash script is invoked there. - updated empty-description patch to use this one from upstream SVN (rev690+691) http://ensc.de/fedora/smart.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/smart-0.41-0.6.src.rpm ============== > - Why are the source and patch numbers not growing from 1 to 2 etc. (Not > really an issue. I just wonder if there's some technical reason for > that.) Allows grouping of related patches/sources without the need to renumber everything when a new patch/source is added. > - What's smart-plugins? The problem with plugins is, that they usually add new dependencies which are not need for the core functionality. So my first 'smart' package had a physical '-plugins' subpackage. Because *current* plugins do not add mentioned dependencies, I merged it back into the main package. > - Don't provide smart-tui because the shell is not a tui. 'smart --shell' is a textual interface for user interaction. So, it can be labeled 'TUI'... But ok, to make it clear, I renamed it to '-tui-shell'.... > - Require rpm version >= 4.3 even though it can be overridden with > epoch. Just so that the package will tell that rpm >= 4.3 should > be used. README should tell this also... Again: there is absolutely no technical reason to add versioned dependencies here; the supported environment (FC4+) has all the needed upstream versions. > - Change smart-gtk to smart-gui. Ok, you have won. I renamed it to 'smart-gui-gtk' which should please everybody. > - If smart-gui (or smart-gtk) belongs to Applications/System, how > can ksmarttray belong to System Environment/Base? Thx, fixed. > - Shouldn't smart-usermode obsolete smart-update and not ksmarttray? 'smart-usermode' and 'smart-update' are having completely different purposes. 'smart-usermode' uses the PAM based userhelper which is intended for sporadic execution by the user. 'smart-update' is called regularly by 'ksmarttray'; upstream and some other repos ship it as a SUID wrapper. I think, this is a horrible idea because of security reason and made it a sudo wrapper. Because only 'ksmarttray' uses it, this package has the needed Provides/Obsoletes. > - The gui package description should say more clearly that it > provides a graphical user interface / frontend. ok, added a 'GUI' there... > - Does %configure contain $RPM_OPT_FLAGS? yes > - Same goes for "install". Perhaps use the macro instead? which macro? > - You use "touch" there. Shouldn't you require /bin/touch then? Or > is there a macro for it instead? 'rpmbuild ...' environments should have coreutils installed > - You use "test" there. The same thing here. Either there is a macro > or you should require "/usr/bin/test". 'test' is a bash builtin > - You use "gtk-update-icon-cache". Shouldn't you require > "/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache" then? thx, it's in the Requires(post): of the -gui-gtk subpackage now; it does not make sense at other places. > - And require those commands in the correct package (if used when > installing a subpackage, require in subpackage). ??? ======= > Um, that isn't strictly true. You can run GNOME/GTK apps in a KDE > environment (e.g. abiword runs fine in KDE) and vice-versa no; Gnome2 apps do not work fine in non Gnome2 environments because important configuration settings (e.g. larger fonts) will not be applied. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 12:44:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:44:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281244.k0SCiRFn032115@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 07:43 EST ------- Buglet: Spec file refers to initng_selinux.patch Patch is named selinux_2.patch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 28 12:52:31 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:52:31 +0200 Subject: Kernel module experiments In-Reply-To: <1138401512.20556.7.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <20060127214329.GT24640@anduril.pams.ncsu.edu> <1138401512.20556.7.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1138452751.22192.32.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 17:38 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 16:43 -0500, Jack Neely wrote: > > 2) Creating kmod-openafs-smp it requires kernel-smp-i686. The > > kernel-smp prackage provides kernel-i686 and kernel-smp but not the > > above. This is the current rawhide kernel I'm building against. What's > > the plan here? I haven't seen kernel-- used before. > > $ rpm -qp --provides .../kernel-smp-2.6.15-1.1878_FC5.i686.rpm > kernel = 2.6.15 > kernel-drm = 4.3.0 > kernel-i686 = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5smp > kernel-smp = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5 > $ rpm -qp --provides .../kernel-smp-2.6.15-1.1878_FC5.ppc.rpm > kernel = 2.6.15 > kernel-drm = 4.3.0 > kernel-ppc = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5smp > kernel-smp = 2.6.15-1.1878_FC5 > > Definitely looks broken to me. Although IMO the package should provide > kernel--, even though yum should only grab the proper > arch. Argh, thanks for the heads up, I wonder how I didn't notice this. The issue was introduced with the RHEL compatibility changes to kmodtool, and the problem is that there's no way to require a fully qualified kernel package so that it'd work with FC and RHEL. FC kernels provide kernel- = , RHEL ones do not, and RHEL kernels provide kernel-- = , FC not. I added a detection hack to kmodtool 0.10.4 (see lirc-kmod and thinkpad-kmod in CVS), that seems to work for me now with FC4, Rawhide, and CentOS 4.2. Adding the kernel-- = provision to the FC kernels wouldn't hurt, though. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 13:13:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:13:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281313.k0SDDSJG002187@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 08:12 EST ------- Buglet (when using selinux patch): Missing build requires: automake, libtool. More seriously: is it a good idea for patches to modify configure.in? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 13:29:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:29:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281329.k0SDTvB0004008@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-28 08:29 EST ------- there are easy to fix. does the patch works for you? I tryed the same code on a test app and it does not hang (the re-exec part seems ok). I have no idea why it hangs after "system is starting 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 13:32:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:32:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281332.k0SDW6kj004358@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-28 08:31 EST ------- (In reply to comment #189) > Buglet (when using selinux patch): > > Missing build requires: automake, libtool. > > More seriously: is it a good idea for patches to modify configure.in? what else should be done to add extra cflags? just edit CFLAGS ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 13:43:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:43:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281343.k0SDhpIx005686@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 08:43 EST ------- I edited CFLAGS in configure I think. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 13:52:31 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:52:31 +0100 Subject: Review please... (mono apps for FE) In-Reply-To: <1138448672.2851.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138314510.4143.1.camel@T7.Linux> <1138408145.20046.86.camel@T7.Linux> <3237e4410601271706r5993072cm23bd8dbf9d3b7717@mail.gmail.com> <1138435395.20046.97.camel@T7.Linux> <1138448672.2851.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060128145231.3d578252.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:44:31 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > The page probably should look similar to the Python page found at > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python > > BTW, that page still has: > --- > Instead of depending on a specific python version, depend on python-abi, > which is provided by the install Python interpreter package, like so: > [...] > Requires: python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]") > --- > Is this still valid in FC4 and newer? I thought rpm handles that on > their own these days. Could someone that knows more details behind this > clean up that page? tia! For FC4 and newer there's an automatic dependency on python(abi) = ... From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 13:46:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:46:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281346.k0SDkhNA006063@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-28 08:46 EST ------- does your system boots with selinux enabled and this patch? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 13:50:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:50:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281350.k0SDoBLW006479@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-28 08:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #192) > I edited CFLAGS in configure I think. Well, that's no good. First the patch is applied and then the autoconf stuff is run, so there will be no configure file when the patch is applied, it is generated later. So dragoran is completely right patching configure.in. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 13:53:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:53:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281353.k0SDrlvN006895@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 08:53 EST ------- I think autoconf is only run *if* you modify configure.in (since that makes configure.in newer than configure). At least this is what happens on my 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 14:07:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:07:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281407.k0SE7L87008694@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 09:06 EST ------- >does your system boots with selinux enabled and this patch? No unfortunately not. And selinux is disabled on my system. My system hangs after initializing the kernel. No messages from initng. Solutions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 14:10:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:10:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281410.k0SEAlU3009189@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-28 09:10 EST ------- on my rawhide sys it hangs with the message: mount: sys already mounted or busy I realy don't know whats gonig on here... does this patch works for you: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=122918 (re-exec stuff is not included) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 14:17:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:17:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281417.k0SEHHeM009802@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 09:16 EST ------- Just to confirm: I compiled initng without the selinux patch and now my system booted (2.6.14-1.1656_FC4, selinux disabled). No obvious issues at first sight. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 14:31:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:31:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281431.k0SEV4Ae011234@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-28 09:30 EST ------- (In reply to comment #66) > > Um, that isn't strictly true. You can run GNOME/GTK apps in a KDE > > environment (e.g. abiword runs fine in KDE) and vice-versa > > no; Gnome2 apps do not work fine in non Gnome2 environments because > important configuration settings (e.g. larger fonts) will not be > applied. They still work "fine" for the average user modulo font/theme issues, especially if they stick with the default Fedora Core themes (i.e. Bluecurve and Clearlooks too, I think) which has been customised to look more or less the same whether running GNOME or KDE apps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 14:35:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:35:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281435.k0SEZOr7011826@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-28 09:35 EST ------- No, drop Requires(post): gtk-update-icon-cache I repeat: From "ScriptletSnippets" wiki page regarding "GTK+ icon cache": "Note that no dependencies should be added for 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 Sat Jan 28 14:51:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:51:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281451.k0SEprqW013492@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 09:51 EST ------- >does this patch works for you: >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=122918 >(re-exec stuff is not included) Yes. Now my computer boots. But remember that on my system selinux is disabled. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 15:07:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:07:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281507.k0SF7GoQ015045@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-01-28 10:06 EST ------- > > no; Gnome2 apps do not work fine in non Gnome2 environments because > > important configuration settings (e.g. larger fonts) will not be > > applied. > > They still work "fine" for the average user modulo font/theme > issues, especially if they stick with the default Fedora Core > themes (i.e. Bluecurve and Clearlooks too, I think) which has been > customised to look more or less the same whether running GNOME or > KDE apps. I do not care about the "average user" (whoever this is). I care about the users whose environment I have to administrate. There, large fonts are *required*. > No, drop Requires(post): gtk-update-icon-cache I do not see, how the icon-cache will be updated in the 1. smart 2. gtk2 installation sequence (which would be possible without the Requires(post)). AFAIS, FC4's gtk2 does not have a script/trigger to update the icon-cache. So, all gtk2 applications will have a 5s startup penalty with the sequence 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 Sat Jan 28 15:22:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:22:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281522.k0SFMR2e016841@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-28 10:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #199) > >does this patch works for you: > >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=122918 > >(re-exec stuff is not included) > > Yes. Now my computer boots. > > But remember that on my system selinux is disabled. can you do this: enable selinux do touch /.autorelabel as root reboot and boot using sysvinit (will take some time to relabel) boot initng with the selinux patch (old one without re-exec) and add enforcing=0 to the kernel cmd line. post all avc messages you get after booting. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 15:58:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:58:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281558.k0SFw2xj020436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-28 10:57 EST ------- (In reply to comment #69) > > They still work "fine" for the average user modulo font/theme > > issues, especially if they stick with the default Fedora Core > > themes (i.e. Bluecurve and Clearlooks too, I think) which has been > > customised to look more or less the same whether running GNOME or > > KDE apps. > > I do not care about the "average user" (whoever this is). I care about > the users whose environment I have to administrate. There, large fonts > are *required*. Well abiword runs just fine under KDE, and we don't call it abiword-gtk and it has the same font problems as smart-gui. Anyway, I think that I can live with smart-gui-gtk, so long as we don't *prevent* it from working with KDE... ;-) (and it should still be visible in the KDE menus as many of the Fedora/Red Hat-specific configuration tools which are GTK/GNOME based are currently visible). Although I would still prefer smart-gui, I'm not doing the review, so I think we can drop this discussion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 18:33:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:33:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281833.k0SIXUnO004142@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-28 13:33 EST ------- There is a build problem with x86_64, specifically some of the tests fail in %check: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/3281-xmldiff-0.6.7-6.fc5/x86_64/build.log If someone with an x86_64 available could help troubleshoot, that would be great. Otherwise should I use BuildArch? ExclusiveArch? Another tag? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 18:58:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:58:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178709] Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281858.k0SIw2XD006478@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-28 13:57 EST ------- May someone review this package, please? This dependency is blocking qucs update. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 19:03:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:03:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281903.k0SJ3qj9007029@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-28 14:03 EST ------- I don't have an x86_64 available yet, but if you end up needing to exclude x86_64, do it with "ExcludeArch: x86_64" and place a comment to the specfile next to that that points to a bugzilla bug number/link with more information (in this case, this bug would be fine). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 19:33:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:33:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179237] New: Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction 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=179237 Summary: Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: tibbs at math.uh.edu QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/swaks/swaks.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/swaks/swaks-20050709.1-1.src.rpm Description: Swiss Army Knife SMTP: A command line SMTP tester. Swaks can test various aspects of your SMTP server, including TLS and AUTH. This package is about as simple as it gets. rpmlint says: W: swaks non-standard-group Utilities E: swaks no-signature At least one package in FC4 is in the Utilities group so I'm not sure why it's nonstandard, but I'll happily change if someone suggests an appropriate group. Note that this program alters its functionality depending on what Perl modules are installed. Technically no non-core modules are requred, but most of the functionality of the program is missing. I have elected to Requires: three modules which are already in Core+Extras (Net::DNS, Time::HiRes, Net::SSLeay). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sat Jan 28 19:38:39 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:38:39 -0700 (MST) Subject: A word on the Evils of Epoch Message-ID: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> In the process of doing a mass rebuild here of all extras packages for current devel/fc5 under mock I ran into an interesting issue: The following packages were released at some point with a "Epoch: 0" set. If you have EVER release a package with an Epoch, you need to keep that around forever after if you expect updates to work. This is due to the fact that a package with a Epoch of 0 is always considered to be newer than a package with no Epoch at all. So far the following packages have show that issue in my builds: netcdf lua obby So, you can't just remove the Epoch:0 and move on, you have to keep it if you put it in there and released any packages with it. FYI, the current list of packages that don't build can be seen at: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/mock-broken.html I am going to try and file more bugs on those packages later today. kevin -------------- 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 Sat Jan 28 19:47:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:47:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281947.k0SJl3Ys012065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 gerda at deds.nl 2006-01-28 14:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #0) > rpmlint says: > W: swaks non-standard-group Utilities > > At least one package in FC4 is in the Utilities group so I'm not sure why it's nonstandard, but I'll happily change if someone suggests an appropriate group. I found a list of valid groups at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups >From that list, Applications/Internet looks appropriate 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 bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 19:55:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:55:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281955.k0SJtFsI012826@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-28 14:55 EST ------- The list of groups used in FC-4 is nearly twice as long (51 groups) so that page must be out of date. I'll do some editing. In any case, Applications/Internet seems reasonable, although a having a 50K Perl script in the same group as Mozilla seems comical. http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/swaks/swaks.spec http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/swaks/swaks-20050709.1-2.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 Jan 28 19:58:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:58:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601281958.k0SJwRZ6013141@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-28 14:58 EST ------- Sorry for the delay on this Enrico. :( I think you addressed all of Paul's comments. I will give another day or two to solicit any additional comments before I approve the package. In particular one of the tor developers mailed me asking if the package could be closer to the upstream spec (I think he was refering to not having the -lsb subpackage). I told him to comment here with any concerns he had. I could see the -lsb subpackage causing problems for upstream. If they link to the extras rpms from their web page and someone downloads the main rpm, they could easily miss the tor-lsb link and get confused trying to install it. If they build from the src.rpm and don't make sure and also install the tor-lsb package they could get confused. The message you get when trying to install just the main tor rpm is not very helpfull to neophyte user: error: Failed dependencies: init(tor) is needed by tor-0.1.0.16-0.fc5.i386 Would you reconsider again the tor-lsb subpackage? While it might be useful for your local env, it's not what most fedora users would expect. NO other package that I can see does things this way either. Perhaps once init-ng gets accepted we should start looking at moving packages to a setup like this, but right now it just makes this package not work as people expect. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From pnasrat at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 20:30:43 2006 From: pnasrat at redhat.com (Paul Nasrat) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:30:43 -0500 Subject: A word on the Evils of Epoch In-Reply-To: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> References: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> Message-ID: <1138480243.3567.14.camel@enki.eridu> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 12:38 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > In the process of doing a mass rebuild here of all extras packages for > current devel/fc5 under mock I ran into an interesting issue: > > The following packages were released at some point with a "Epoch: 0" > set. If you have EVER release a package with an Epoch, you need to > keep that around forever after if you expect updates to work. > > This is due to the fact that a package with a Epoch of 0 is always > considered to be newer than a package with no Epoch at all. This is not true anymore, and hasn't been since rpm 4.2.1. Paul From stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 21:03:06 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 16:03:06 -0500 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1138482186.4853.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 17:59 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/26/06, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > > Is there any reason why the latest updates of rdiff-backup where not > > issued for FC3? This way, I can no longer use it to backup between my > > laptop (FC3) and server (FC4). > > > > I just verified that the current srpm package for FC4 > > (rdiff-backup-1.0.1-1.fc4.src.rpm) builds and works correctly also in > > FC3, so I think it would be just a matter of adding it to the build > > queue... > > FC3 has entered maintainence mode with the release of FC5test2. > There is no policy for Fedora Extras that requires maintainers to > supply packages for Core releases that have entered maintainence mode. > If the original maintainer doesn't want the burden of keeping FC3 > updated now that its in maintainence mode, another maintainer may need > to express interest in supplying those updates. I wonder if whether, just as the idea of supplying a final yum update with configuration files pointing to the Legacy project repos was discussed, the same might be said about mock. This might aid maintainers who are willing to continue supporting packages for releases that have entered maintenance mode. -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sat Jan 28 21:05:13 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:05:13 -0700 (MST) Subject: A word on the Evils of Epoch References: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> <1138480243.3567.14.camel@enki.eridu> Message-ID: <20060128.140513.279230849.kevin@scrye.com> >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Nasrat writes: Paul> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 12:38 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> In the process of doing a mass rebuild here of all extras packages >> for current devel/fc5 under mock I ran into an interesting issue: >> >> The following packages were released at some point with a "Epoch: >> 0" set. If you have EVER release a package with an Epoch, you need >> to keep that around forever after if you expect updates to work. >> >> This is due to the fact that a package with a Epoch of 0 is always >> considered to be newer than a package with no Epoch at all. Paul> This is not true anymore, and hasn't been since rpm 4.2.1. Dho. You are quite right. :( I thought it was still the case... I think http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Tools/RPM/VersionComparison needs to be updated to reflect that. I guess the thing that threw me off was yum reporting packages with "0:" at the front even though they really didn't have Epochs. I will try and track down the real problem... Paul> Paul kevin -------------- 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 Sat Jan 28 21:27:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 16:27:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601282127.k0SLRF03022435@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 stickster at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version| |0.6.7-7 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-28 16:27 EST ------- Build good, you should see 0.6.7-7 shortly in the mirrors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 21:43:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 16:43:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601282143.k0SLhBVG024155@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-28 16:43 EST ------- Note that the comment syntax used in 0.6.7-7's ExcludeArch does not do what I think you expected: $ rpm -qp --qf '[%{EXCLUDEARCH}\n]' xmldiff-0.6.7-7.fc5.src.rpm x86_64 # see bug #177083 The comment should be moved away from the ExcludeArch line. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sat Jan 28 22:26:40 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:26:40 +0200 Subject: A word on the Evils of Epoch In-Reply-To: <20060128.140513.279230849.kevin@scrye.com> References: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> <1138480243.3567.14.camel@enki.eridu> <20060128.140513.279230849.kevin@scrye.com> Message-ID: <1138487200.6240.10.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 14:05 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Nasrat writes: > Paul> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 12:38 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> This is due to the fact that a package with a Epoch of 0 is always > >> considered to be newer than a package with no Epoch at all. > > Paul> This is not true anymore, and hasn't been since rpm 4.2.1. > > Dho. You are quite right. :( I thought it was still the case... There's at least one more case where it still is, rpm -F. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/143301 From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 22:33:26 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:33:26 -0500 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 In-Reply-To: <1138482186.4853.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> <1138482186.4853.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910601281433j54a58e4aye36f090be25e920f@mail.gmail.com> On 1/28/06, Paul W. Frields wrote: > I wonder if whether, just as the idea of supplying a final yum update > with configuration files pointing to the Legacy project repos was > discussed, the same might be said about mock. This might aid > maintainers who are willing to continue supporting packages for releases > that have entered maintenance mode. If a "maintainer" can't figure out how to reconfigure mock to use a legacy target... should i really be encouraging them to pick up the burden of provided maintainence updates? -jef From stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 28 22:43:08 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:43:08 -0500 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601281433j54a58e4aye36f090be25e920f@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> <1138482186.4853.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910601281433j54a58e4aye36f090be25e920f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1138488188.11424.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 17:33 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/28/06, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > I wonder if whether, just as the idea of supplying a final yum update > > with configuration files pointing to the Legacy project repos was > > discussed, the same might be said about mock. This might aid > > maintainers who are willing to continue supporting packages for releases > > that have entered maintenance mode. > > If a "maintainer" can't figure out how to reconfigure mock to use a > legacy target... should i really be encouraging them to pick up the > burden of provided maintainence updates? If a "system administrator" can't figure out how to reconfigure yum to use Legacy depots for picking up security fixes... etc., etc....? It's not about encouraging ignorance, it was simply a chance to provide some QA through an existing, automated channel. After all, mock will have to provide new configuration information in the FC5 distro, so why not? (Well, okay, "will have to" is more like "probably should.") One person making the changes as opposed to thousands seems like a no-brainer to me. *shrug* -- 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: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 28 22:40:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:40:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601282240.k0SMeR3r029780@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From kevin.kofler at chello.at 2006-01-28 17:40 EST ------- > no; Gnome2 apps do not work fine in non Gnome2 environments because > important configuration settings (e.g. larger fonts) will not be > applied. Write your font/theme settings into the system-wide /etc/gtk-2.0/gtkrc (by hand, as none of the config tools write there). That way, the settings will get applied at system or application startup, without needing some GNOME theme manager to run. (Even rhgb gets the settings.) That's what I'm doing to force my GTK+ apps to use Bluecurve instead of Clearlooks (I want them to match my KDE desktop, not to look "pretty" or "modern", Bluecurve has worked well since it was introduced in RHL8 and I don't see the point of yet another theme - but that's a different flamewar ;-) ) and it works perfectly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 22:52:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:52:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601282252.k0SMqNq8031209@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 stickster at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|0.6.7-7 |0.6.7-8 ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-28 17:52 EST ------- You're right, it doesn't do what I expected. Chalk it up to the uncertainty of the words "next to". ;-) Fixed in 0.6.7-8. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 28 23:07:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:07:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601282307.k0SN7InK032658@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 arma at mit.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |arma at mit.edu ------- Additional Comments From arma at mit.edu 2006-01-28 18:07 EST ------- Hi folks, I'm the Tor project leader, Roger Dingledine ("the upstream"). I've been trying to keep an eye on this discussion. What I most want from this is an rpm that I can point people running Red Hat like systems to. So anything that confuses people on various RPM-based systems is bad. (This seems to include the lsb stuff, if what Kevin says is right.) (Enrico's point about running the RPM on a system without gcc, make, etc is odd, since most people I know use their computer for many things at once.) We currently ship an RPM spec file that seems to work pretty well. The only problem is that we don't have an official unified maintainer that we know to maintain it, build new RPMs, and so on. Keeping the Fedora Extras spec similar to this would help in sending patches upstream and downstream. I'm also concerned about dependencies like fedora-groupadd. Is this going to be an RPM that is only useful for people running a particular configuration of Fedora, or can we make it more general? If it is too niche, then we will end up with competing RPMs, which is bad. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 01:53:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:53:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173683] Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601290153.k0T1r9tt015457@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bidiv (BiDi Viewer) - display logical-Hebrew text https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173683 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-28 20:53 EST ------- Good: - rpmlint clean - 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 FC4 i386 - 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 Minor: don't need to specify Bidiv - in the Summary. Users already know what package they are querying. 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 Sun Jan 29 03:11:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:11:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175463] Review Request: tclsoap - SOAP support for Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601290311.k0T3BRwP022336@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclsoap - SOAP support for Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175463 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-28 22:11 EST ------- Good: - rpmlint clean - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (MIT) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on FC4 i386 - 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 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 wart at kobold.org Sun Jan 29 04:06:41 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:06:41 -0800 Subject: branch creation email Message-ID: <43DC3F51.70902@kobold.org> RFE for the CVS admins: Would it be possible to generate an automated email to package owners when new branches are created for their packages? Currently I have to keep hitting 'refresh' on the CVSSyncNeeded page, or run 'cvs update' to see when new branches are made. It would be nicer if I just got an email when it was done. --Wart From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 04:39:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:39:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173724] Review Request: libyahoo2 - Library for the Yahoo! Messenger Protocol In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601290439.k0T4dlG4030173@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 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 2006-01-28 23:39 EST ------- Missing BuildRequires: glib2-devel rpmlint -i libyahoo2-0.7.5-1.i386.rpm E: libyahoo2 library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib/libyahoo2.so.9.0.0 This package contains a library and provides no %post with a call to ldconfig. E: libyahoo2 library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib/libyahoo2.so.9.0.0 This package contains a library and provides no %postun with a call to ldconfig. * Use of buildroot is not consistant (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#UsingBuildRootOptFlags) * Missing SMP flags. If it doesn't build with it, please add a comment (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 05:29:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177232] Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601290529.k0T5Tcue002004@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jpmahowald at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-29 00:29 EST ------- Not a review, but: * Don't use Vendor: tag. * Don't do the conditional %clean, just rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. You set a sane BuildRoot. * "(see table above)" in %description doesn't make sense, probably from a copy/paste. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 29 05:45:35 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:45:35 -0800 Subject: branch creation email In-Reply-To: <43DC3F51.70902@kobold.org> References: <43DC3F51.70902@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1138513535.19515.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 20:06 -0800, Wart wrote: > It would be nicer if I just got an > email when it was done. ++ From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 09:59:45 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:59:45 +0100 Subject: branch creation email In-Reply-To: <1138513535.19515.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> References: <43DC3F51.70902@kobold.org> <1138513535.19515.5.camel@locolhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138528785.2849.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 28.01.2006, 21:45 -0800 schrieb Michael A. Peters: > On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 20:06 -0800, Wart wrote: > > It would be nicer if I just got an > > email when it was done. > > ++ Simply subscribing to the CVSSyncNeeded page in the wiki should do the trick. Yes, I know, that's not a perfect solution, but an interim solution until the branches are created in a better way (that point is already on the FESCo agenda). HTH CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Sun Jan 29 11:13:23 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:13:23 +0100 Subject: A word on the Evils of Epoch In-Reply-To: <1138480243.3567.14.camel@enki.eridu> (Paul Nasrat's message of "Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:30:43 -0500") References: <20060128.123839.409859340.kevin@scrye.com> <1138480243.3567.14.camel@enki.eridu> Message-ID: <87u0bnb830.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> pnasrat at redhat.com (Paul Nasrat) writes: >> This is due to the fact that a package with a Epoch of 0 is always >> considered to be newer than a package with no Epoch at all. > > This is not true anymore, and hasn't been since rpm 4.2.1. It IS still true for the rpm.versionCompare() method in rpm-python-4.4.1-22. Enrico -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 480 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 11:12:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:12:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175551] Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291112.k0TBClKF012019@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175551 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-29 06:12 EST ------- I made a mistake in the srpm url, it is http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/asa-1.2-1.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 Sun Jan 29 11:13:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:13:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179263] New: Review Request: perl-Text-Unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text 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=179263 Summary: Review Request: perl-Text-Unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: pertusus at free.fr QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SRPM Name or Url: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/perl-Text-Unidecode-0.04-1.src.rpm Description: Text::Unidecode provides a function, `unidecode(...)' that takes Unicode data and tries to represent it in US-ASCII characters (i.e., the universally displayable characters between 0x00 and 0x7F). The representation is almost always an attempt at *transliteration* -- i.e., conveying, in Roman letters, the pronunciation expressed by the text in some other writing 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 11:31:13 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:31:13 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages Message-ID: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. tia! Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC How should they get used? Simple: If you have a packages that uses ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch to exclude some architectures from the build you need to file a separate bug for them [*1]. This bug should be marked as blocking the corresponding tracker bug(s) listed above -- this simplifies tracking such issues for other people interested in these archs that might want to take a look into the problem and fix it. Note: If the bug you created for your package is probably unfixable (Examples: apt for x86-64 will probably never happen; wine for ppc seems also unlikely; Packages specific to ppc that use a ExclusiveArch: ppc ppc64) then you should close the bug directly after reporting. Otherwise leave it open. CU thl [*1] -- Quote from http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines > 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. -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- 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 Jan 29 11:42:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:42:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291142.k0TBgHR1016331@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info 2006-01-29 06:42 EST ------- Sorry, I have to jump in here ;-) (In reply to comment #12) > [...] but if you end up needing to exclude > x86_64, do it with "ExcludeArch: x86_64" and place a comment to the specfile > next to that that points to a bugzilla bug number/link with more information (in > this case, this bug would be fine). The last sentence is not 100% correct. Please open a separate bug for it just as the Review Guidelines demand: 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: FE-ExcludeArch-x86, FE-ExcludeArch-x64, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc (Okay, the last sentence is just half an hour old, but the other part is older.) Paul, and please attach the build-log with the error to that bug because it will be deleted from the server in some days. And btw: A simple google search shows that other distributions were able to get it running on x86_64 so it's probably not that hard to fix (even if the packager has no access to that x86_64). /me also wonders if we need a defined wait period (4 days?) before a ExludeArch like this is allowed (especially in new packages) -- people interested in x86_64 practically had no chance to look at this problem and help fixing before the package was pushed. That not how it should work IMHO. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 11:55:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:55:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291155.k0TBtEgI017436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-29 06:55 EST ------- (In reply to comment #16) > And btw: A simple google search shows that other distributions were able to > get it running on x86_64 so it's probably not that hard to fix Well, many people and distributions often don't run test suites during builds and sometimes ship plain broken packages :). I haven't checked if that's the case here. > people interested in x86_64 > practically had no chance to look at this problem and help fixing before the > package was pushed. That not how it should work IMHO. Agreed. I was unpleasantly surprised to see this pushed with ExcludeArch and "build good" comment about two hours after my "...if you end up needing to exclude x86_64..." comment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 29 12:01:45 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:01:45 +0200 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138536105.7167.26.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 12:31 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC FWIW, I think those suffixes are somewhat hard to remember, -i386, -x86_64, and -ppc would have been easier. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 12:04:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:04:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291204.k0TC4HPi018205@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info 2006-01-29 07:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > And btw: A simple google search shows that other distributions were able to > > get it running on x86_64 so it's probably not that hard to fix > > Well, many people and distributions often don't run test suites during builds > and sometimes ship plain broken packages :). Yeah, that's true ;-) > I haven't checked if that's the > case here. Paul? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Jan 29 12:32:23 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:32:23 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. > tia! > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > How should they get used? Simple: If you have a packages that uses > ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch to exclude some architectures from the > build you need to file a separate bug for them [*1]. This bug should be > marked as blocking the corresponding tracker bug(s) listed above -- this > simplifies tracking such issues for other people interested in these > archs that might want to take a look into the problem and fix it. > What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? Regards, Hans From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 12:24:53 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:24:53 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138536105.7167.26.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138536105.7167.26.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <1138537493.2849.44.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 14:01 +0200 schrieb Ville Skytt?: > On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 12:31 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > FWIW, I think those suffixes are somewhat hard to remember, -i386, /me feared that there will be questions "Is this for i586 and i686, too?" But if others agree feel free to change. > -x86_64, Well, if others agree we can change that one also. But the Windows- and Hardware-World uses x64 now and is quite popular. And x86_64 is confusing, too: It's sometimes used as x86_64 (kernel and rpm) or x86-64 (as used by AMD in the beginning; it slipped in to a lot of other places). And does it mean ia32e (used in bugzilla), too? /me chooses not to mention the correct names "EM64T" and "AMD64" > and -ppc would have been easier. Agreed, changed. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 12:29:34 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:29:34 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:32 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. > > tia! > > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > > > How should they get used? Simple: If you have a packages that uses > > ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch to exclude some architectures from the > > build you need to file a separate bug for them [*1]. This bug should be > > marked as blocking the corresponding tracker bug(s) listed above -- this > > simplifies tracking such issues for other people interested in these > > archs that might want to take a look into the problem and fix it. > > > > What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a > userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain > archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain hardware only found on certain archs". So it should be written down somewhere. A bug is the right place for it. And in such cases you simply can close the bug after reporting (as I wrote in the first mail). Cu thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Jan 29 12:30:36 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:30:36 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138537836.14256.23.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 12:31 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. > tia! > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > How should they get used? Why have users to cope with this at all? It probably wouldn't be too difficult to write script to iterate through all *.specs or srpms and update such bugzilla PRs automatically. Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 12:50:52 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:50:52 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138537836.14256.23.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138537836.14256.23.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138539052.2849.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:30 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 12:31 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. > > tia! only to fedora-extras-list please -- maintainers got a head-up this way and can participate here in the discussion if they want. Otherwise the discussion is dispersed on two lists and their archives and that is quite confusing (see the replies to the daily rawhide reports as eample -- parts of the discussion runs on fedora-test-list, others on fedora-devel, and some on both) > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > > > How should they get used? > Why have users Packagers, not users. > to cope with this at all? We need the reason why a packager is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch somewhere documented. Bugzilla is the right place for this IMHO. > It probably wouldn't be too difficult to write script The script does not know why the package is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch. > to iterate through > all *.specs or srpms and update such bugzilla PRs automatically. Update??? A bug only should be filed once when the ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch is added -- in most cases this will during/after review. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Jan 29 12:51:50 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:51:50 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138539111.14256.27.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 13:29 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:32 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a > > userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain > > archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? > > In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers > disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. Please explain, I fail to understand the rationale. > Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain > hardware only found on certain archs". It already is: Inside of the spec. All you do is adding administration overhead. Ralf From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Jan 29 13:47:39 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:47:39 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43DCC77B.2030802@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:32 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. >>> tia! >>> >>> Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: >>> >>> 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 >>> 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 >>> 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC >>> >>> How should they get used? Simple: If you have a packages that uses >>> ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch to exclude some architectures from the >>> build you need to file a separate bug for them [*1]. This bug should be >>> marked as blocking the corresponding tracker bug(s) listed above -- this >>> simplifies tracking such issues for other people interested in these >>> archs that might want to take a look into the problem and fix it. >>> >> What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a >> userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain >> archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? > > In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers > disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. > > Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain > hardware only found on certain archs". So it should be written down > somewhere. A bug is the right place for it. And in such cases you simply > can close the bug after reporting (as I wrote in the first mail). > I find this purely administrative overhead with little or no gain. When drafting policies please remeber that Fedora is a volunteer driven project. Policies like this remind me of my day time job, and thats a job for the Dutch goverment, or about as bureaucratic as one can get. I maintain several hardware related packages which fall under this policy / decision and I refuse to enter bugs for them. If someone else feels the need to open bugs against them for this feel free to do so, but I want open them myself. Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 14:13:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:13:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291413.k0TED2b0030708@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-29 09:12 EST ------- The Fedorized alsasound.i I submitted unfortunately does not solve the problem of the sound devices occasionally not being created. I was too hasty. I really don't understand what is going on. Turning on logging in udev did not reveal anything. udevd simply does not seem to receive the required events. I will stop looking at initng for a while. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 14:22:15 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:22:15 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <43DCC77B.2030802@hhs.nl> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCC77B.2030802@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1138544536.3404.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 14:47 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:32 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>> Sorry for crossposting -- replies please only to fedora-extras-list. > >>> tia! > >>> > >>> Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > >>> > >>> 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > >>> 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > >>> 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > >>> > >>> How should they get used? Simple: If you have a packages that uses > >>> ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch to exclude some architectures from the > >>> build you need to file a separate bug for them [*1]. This bug should be > >>> marked as blocking the corresponding tracker bug(s) listed above -- this > >>> simplifies tracking such issues for other people interested in these > >>> archs that might want to take a look into the problem and fix it. > >>> > >> What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a > >> userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain > >> archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? > > > > In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers > > disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. > > > > Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain > > hardware only found on certain archs". So it should be written down > > somewhere. A bug is the right place for it. And in such cases you simply > > can close the bug after reporting (as I wrote in the first mail). > > > > I find this purely administrative overhead with little or no gain. There is one thing in this discussion that I don't understand: It seems I'm the bad guy now for a small modification (that several people requested in the past) to a policy that we have for several month now. Did I miss anything? All I requested was to link that bug to another. Nobody complained before about the "Bugs need be filed for all ExcludeArchs" rule that is there for a long time already. > When > drafting policies please remeber that Fedora is a volunteer driven project. That needs rules because it can't live without it. Sometimes there are rules that people don't like. That's life, but we have to deal with it somehow. > Policies like this remind me of my day time job, and thats a job for the > Dutch goverment, or about as bureaucratic as one can get. :-) > > I maintain several hardware related packages which fall under this > policy / decision and I refuse to enter bugs for them. If someone else > feels the need to open bugs against them for this feel free to do so, > but I want open them myself. > I nowhere requested that bugs for all existing ExcluseArchs need to be filed. But I would be glad if the packagers or someone else could do that, yes. Anyway, as you said, we are a volunteer driven project and I'm willing to change the rules if they are to bureaucratic. "civil disobedience mode" does not help in the long term. So, if anyone has a better idea how to handle this stuff please post it to me and we'll talk about it in FESCo. But when doing this please remember this: There are volunteers in FE that are interested in archs (x86_64, ppc) that a lot of packagers don't own. Those x86_64/ppc people need a way to track and fix packaging-issues that the packagers on i386 can't fix. And they need a way to distinguish between "ExludeArch because a package is for certain archs only" and "ExludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it". Hans, would you prefer if we handle the "ExludeArch because a package is for certain archs only" handle in the spec files directly as comment? I see no way around bugzilla for the "ExludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it" case. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 14:31:48 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:31:48 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138539111.14256.27.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138539111.14256.27.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138545108.3404.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:51 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 13:29 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 13:32 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a > > > userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain > > > archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? > > > > In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers > > disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. > Please explain, I fail to understand the rationale. I have no strong feeling about it. But to me it sound like a good idea to have all ExludeArchs tracked in one place. And we IMHO need bugzilla for the "ExludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it" case where someone interested in x86_64 or ppc needs to step up and fix the package for that arch. > > Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain > > hardware only found on certain archs". > It already is: Inside of the spec. All you do is adding administration > overhead. "All you do..."??? This paragraph is in the Package Review Guidelines for a long time already: 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. Nobody complained so loudly before -- why suddenly? All *I* requested is to link this bug to the tracker bug -- that takes only 5 seconds per bug. This whole discussion took much more time already. "All Fesco does with this rule" would probably be more suitable -- so okay, I you guys don't like that "MUST" rule then we can try to revisit it and modify it. See the other mail to Hans I wrote some minutes ago for details. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Sun Jan 29 14:43:39 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:43:39 +0100 Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:10:46 +0200." <1138443046.18823.15.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <200601291443.k0TEhh4q025769@mx1.redhat.com> ville.skytta at iki.fi said: > Note that depending on what "Top 10 packagers" means, counting FE-ACCEPTed > packages from Bugzilla might not be the right thing to do. Loads of packages > in Extras were imported from fedora.us and so don't have any reviews in > bugzilla.redhat.com. Counting that metric from owners.list could be better. You're quite right. I now also parse the owners file and changed the wording of some things. Here's the current output. I'll update the scripts wiki page shortly. There are still quite a number of additional things I'd like to check... just have to find some time... Cheers, Christian --- === About owners file === We have 1392 extras packages in owners file. There are 67 orphans. Top 10 package owners: tcallawa at redhat dot com : 88 ville dot skytta at iki dot fi : 82 jpo at di dot uminho dot pt : 81 matthias at rpmforge dot net : 70 andreas dot bierfert at lowlatency dot de : 54 rc040203 at freenet dot de : 50 ivazquez at ivazquez dot net : 41 rdieter at math dot unl dot edu : 41 gauret at free dot fr : 40 steve at silug dot org : 28 === About FE-ACCEPT packages === We have 10 accepted, closed packages where I'm unable to find the package in the development repo: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165488,168185,171601,172136,172144,172150,172151,173216,174266,177083 We have 5 accepted, closed packages where I'm unable to find the package in the owners file: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165992,167863,168185,168920,171801 We have 452 accepted, closed package reviews Top 10 BZ review requests submitters: tcallawa at redhat dot com : 43 rc040203 at freenet dot de : 41 andreas dot bierfert at lowlatency dot de : 29 fedora dot wickert at arcor dot de : 26 jpo at di dot uminho dot pt : 22 rdieter at math dot unl dot edu : 18 orion at cora dot nwra dot com : 13 pertusus at free dot fr : 13 ivazquez at ivazquez dot net : 12 paul at city-fan dot org : 11 Top 10 BZ review requests reviewers: gauret at free dot fr : 63 paul at city-fan dot org : 62 gdk at redhat dot com : 34 tcallawa at redhat dot com : 24 jpmahowald at gmail dot com : 24 rc040203 at freenet dot de : 22 jpo at di dot uminho dot pt : 19 adrian at lisas dot de : 18 ed at eh3 dot com : 18 ville dot skytta at iki dot fi : 14 We have 11 accepted, open package reviews where the package appears to already be in the repo... All open packages already available: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=166207,166251,166252,166253,166254,168905,171334,171336,176618,177038,177166 === About FE-NEW packages === We have 9 closed tickets still blocking FE-NEW https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=167621,168906,177272,177274,177662,177859,178141,178902,179039 === About FE-REVIEW packages === From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Jan 29 14:58:13 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:58:13 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138544536.3404.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCC77B.2030802@hhs.nl> <1138544536.3404.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43DCD805.3@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 14:47 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>> What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a >>>> userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain >>>> archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? >>> In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers >>> disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. >>> >>> Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain >>> hardware only found on certain archs". So it should be written down >>> somewhere. A bug is the right place for it. And in such cases you simply >>> can close the bug after reporting (as I wrote in the first mail). >>> >> I find this purely administrative overhead with little or no gain. > > There is one thing in this discussion that I don't understand: It seems > I'm the bad guy now for a small modification (that several people > requested in the past) to a policy that we have for several month now. > Did I miss anything? All I requested was to link that bug to another. > Nobody complained before about the "Bugs need be filed for all > ExcludeArchs" rule that is there for a long time already. > This is in no way meant personal, you're the FESco chair, you're speaking on behalf of FESco, I'm replying to FESco, not to you personal. Didn't you notice this big bullseye on your back yet ? > Anyway, as you said, we are a volunteer driven project and I'm willing > to change the rules if they are to bureaucratic. "civil disobedience > mode" does not help in the long term. So, if anyone has a better idea > how to handle this stuff please post it to me and we'll talk about it in > FESCo. > > But when doing this please remember this: There are volunteers in FE > that are interested in archs (x86_64, ppc) that a lot of packagers don't > own. Those x86_64/ppc people need a way to track and fix > packaging-issues that the packagers on i386 can't fix. And they need a > way to distinguish between "ExludeArch because a package is for certain > archs only" and "ExludeArch because the packager was not able to fix > it". > Agreed, actually I'm an x86_64 user, and I (think I) have the skills to fix x86_64 bugs so I'm all for such a tracker bug. For the "ExcludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it" case, for the other case however it is pure unneeded administrative pressure. Thats why I asked you to clarify, and thats why I reacted as I did when in your clarification you said that this rule applied to all cases/ scenarios. > Hans, would you prefer if we handle the "ExludeArch because a package is > for certain archs only" handle in the spec files directly as comment? Yes, that would be exactly what I want. That would also keep the normal bugzilla components (everything but "Package Review" component) for what they are meant: Bugs, not building on an arch where the package should reasonably built is a bug, not building because it is useless is not a bug. (Some might even built, but since they are useless why would one built them?) > I see no way around bugzilla for the "ExludeArch because the packager was > not able to fix it" case. > Agreed, that is not what I'm asking for, I actually like that part. Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 14:46:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:46:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291446.k0TEkTuI001595@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-29 09:46 EST ------- Not a review, but you've got some duplicate BuildRequires. According to fedora-qa script: Duplicate BuildRequires: zlib-devel (by openssl-devel), openssl-devel (by curl-devel), atk-devel (by gtk2-devel), glib2-devel (by gtk2-devel), pango-devel (by gtk2-devel), XFree86-devel (by gtk2-devel), freetype-devel (by pango-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 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Jan 29 15:03:41 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:03:41 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138545108.3404.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138539111.14256.27.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138545108.3404.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <43DCD94D.1090809@hhs.nl> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Nobody complained so loudly before -- why suddenly? All *I* requested is > to link this bug to the tracker bug -- that takes only 5 seconds per > bug. This whole discussion took much more time already. > > "All Fesco does with this rule" would probably be more suitable -- so > okay, I you guys don't like that "MUST" rule then we can try to revisit > it and modify it. See the other mail to Hans I wrote some minutes ago > for details. Speaking only for myself: The problem is not the tracker bug it is your clarification / reply to my initial question if this should be done in all cases. In practice reviewers have been handling it as suggested in your reply to my second mail this thread. It is not necessary to write down every exception in the guidelines / procedures, it is necessary to allow for interpretation room, your reply took the room (which I thought was there for interpretation) away. Regards, Hans From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 29 15:10:09 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:10:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060129151009.8C2788004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 7 abcm2ps-4.12.5-1.fc3 clisp-2.38-1.fc3 grads-1.9b4-6.fc3.1 pl-5.6.3-1.fc3 plt-scheme-301-1.fc3 rxvt-unicode-7.4-1.fc3 scmxx-0.8.2-1.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 Jan 29 15:10:27 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:10:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060129151027.32B388004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 11 abcm2ps-4.12.5-1.fc4 clisp-2.38-1.fc4 foremost-1.1-1.fc4 gquilt-0.16-1.fc4 grads-1.9b4-6.fc4 pl-5.6.3-1.fc4 plt-scheme-301-1.fc4 rxvt-unicode-7.4-1.fc4 scmxx-0.8.2-1.fc4 xmldiff-0.6.7-7.fc4 xmldiff-0.6.7-8.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 Jan 29 15:11:12 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:11:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060129151112.8E79F8004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 19 abcm2ps-4.12.5-1.fc5 azureus-2.3.0.6-21.fc5 balsa-2.3.10-1.fc5 bidiv-1.5-1.fc5 clisp-2.38-1.fc5 contact-lookup-applet-0.13-7.fc5 exo-0.3.0-11.fc5 foremost-1.1-1.fc5 gquilt-0.16-1.fc5 irssi-0.8.10-3.fc5 pl-5.6.3-1.fc5 plt-scheme-301-1.fc5 rxvt-unicode-7.4-1.fc5 scmxx-0.8.2-1.fc5 tclsoap-1.6.7-1.fc5 themes-backgrounds-gnome-0.4-1 themes-backgrounds-gnome-0.4-2.fc5 xmldiff-0.6.7-7.fc5 xmldiff-0.6.7-8.fc5 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 Jan 29 15:25:36 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:25:36 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <43DCD805.3@hhs.nl> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCB5D7.5050904@hhs.nl> <1138537775.2849.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCC77B.2030802@hhs.nl> <1138544536.3404.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43DCD805.3@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1138548336.3594.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 15:58 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 14:47 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede: > >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>>> What if the ExclusiveArch is not a bug but a feature, for example say a > >>>> userspace support tools for certain hardware only found on certain > >>>> archs? Then there is no problem to fix, should one then still file bugs? > >>> In the past I would have said "no" but a lot of other packagers > >>> disagreed and convinced me -- so the answer is a "yes" from me now. > >>> > >>> Other people simply might not know that the package is "for certain > >>> hardware only found on certain archs". So it should be written down > >>> somewhere. A bug is the right place for it. And in such cases you simply > >>> can close the bug after reporting (as I wrote in the first mail). > >>> > >> I find this purely administrative overhead with little or no gain. > > > > There is one thing in this discussion that I don't understand: It seems > > I'm the bad guy now for a small modification (that several people > > requested in the past) to a policy that we have for several month now. > > Did I miss anything? All I requested was to link that bug to another. > > Nobody complained before about the "Bugs need be filed for all > > ExcludeArchs" rule that is there for a long time already. > > This is in no way meant personal, you're the FESco chair, you're > speaking on behalf of FESco, I'm replying to FESco, not to you personal. > > Didn't you notice this big bullseye on your back yet ? > :-) >[...] > > Hans, would you prefer if we handle the "ExludeArch because a package is > > for certain archs only" handle in the spec files directly as comment? > > Yes, that would be exactly what I want. That would also keep the normal > bugzilla components (everything but "Package Review" component) for what > they are meant: Bugs, not building on an arch where the package should > reasonably built is a bug, not building because it is useless is not a > bug. (Some might even built, but since they are useless why would one > built them?) Well, there needs to be a place where is written "thinkpad-foo is not build for x86_64 and ppc because their don't exists notebooks for that arch (even if it might build on x86_64)". Do we all agree on that? I think we do. But I would prefer *one* place for this information rather then splitting it into two. Why? Let's play x86-64 developer that wonders why thinkpad-foo is in extras/4/i386 but missing in extras/4/x86_64: Scenario a (everything in bugzilla): - He jumps to the dep-tree view of the well know tracker bug (he has a bookmark for it because he often needs it) an simply searches for thinkpad-foo with his browser and finds the explanation Scenario b (some notes in bugzilla, some in the spec file): - He jumps to the dep-tree view of the well know tracker bug (he has a bookmark for it because he often needs it) and finds nothing. - He now either looks for the complete cvs checkout or the cvs web-interface for thinkpad-foo reads the explanation there. Scenario a is IMHO a lot easier for the x86-64 person. For the packager it's IMHO not a big difference to add a explanation to a spec file or to open a bug (and close it directly after that) (Maybe some people disagree with me here). (Side note: Some people don't like longish comments in the spec file because they clutter it. Second example: Lenovo releases a notebook with x86_64 cpu. Scenario a (everything in bugzilla): - x86_64 developer stumbles about the closed x86_64 bug while he was working in the tracker bug. He thinks: "Lenovo released a notebook with a x86_64 cpu -- we need to reopen that" and does exactly it. Scenario b (some notes in bugzilla, some in the spec file): - He probably does not notice. If he does he need to open a bug. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 16:21:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:21:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175463] Review Request: tclsoap - SOAP support for Tcl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291621.k0TGLW36010614@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclsoap - SOAP support for Tcl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175463 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 11:21 EST ------- Package imported and built without problems on devel. Thanks for the 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 Sun Jan 29 16:21:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:21:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173499] Review Request: lagan: Local, global, and multiple alignment of DNA sequences In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291621.k0TGLa65010646@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lagan: Local, global, and multiple alignment of DNA sequences https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173499 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-29 11:21 EST ------- Minor: Build has a bunch of warning: ignoring return value of x, declared with attribute warn_unused_result Your patch sets the lagan dir but leaves the error messages that $LAGAN_DIR was not set, although you don't use the env variables. Good: - rpmlint checks return: W: lagan non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec not too significant as per comment 1 - 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 FC4 i386 - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR (can remove commented R and BR lines if desired) - 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 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 Sun Jan 29 16:52:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:52:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174494] Review Request: libopensync-plugin-irmc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291652.k0TGq34E013747@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libopensync-plugin-irmc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174494 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 2006-01-29 11:51 EST ------- Seems to be missing BuildRequires: openobex-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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 29 17:23:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:23:50 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138539052.2849.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138537836.14256.23.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138539052.2849.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060129182350.544907b5.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:50:52 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > > > > > How should they get used? > > Why have users > > Packagers, not users. > > > to cope with this at all? > > We need the reason why a packager is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch somewhere > documented. Bugzilla is the right place for this IMHO. No, the .spec file is. Bugzilla may be used to track existing packages which are affected by ExcludeArch tags. But prior to that, the spec file must explain the reason for using ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch. > > It probably wouldn't be too difficult to write script > > The script does not know why the package is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch. First talk about how to enter such information to a spec file, then talk about how a script can extract the information. ;-) > > to iterate through > > all *.specs or srpms and update such bugzilla PRs automatically. > > Update??? A bug only should be filed once when the > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch is added -- in most cases this will > during/after review. Doesn't suffice. Imagine an upstream upgrade can be built for all archs. Who looks up the tracker tickets in bugzilla? From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Jan 29 18:05:10 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:05:10 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <20060129182350.544907b5.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138537836.14256.23.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138539052.2849.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060129182350.544907b5.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1138557910.14256.41.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 18:23 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:50:52 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-PPC > > > > > > > > How should they get used? > > > Why have users > > > > Packagers, not users. I used the wrong word, and actually meant packagers. > > > to cope with this at all? > > > > We need the reason why a packager is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch somewhere > > documented. Bugzilla is the right place for this IMHO. > > No, the .spec file is. > > Bugzilla may be used to track existing packages which are affected > by ExcludeArch tags. But prior to that, the spec file must explain > the reason for using ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch. ACK. > > > It probably wouldn't be too difficult to write script > > > > The script does not know why the package is ExcludeArch/ExlusiveArch. > > First talk about how to enter such information to a spec file, Manually, maintainer decision. > then talk about how a script can extract the information. ;-) 1. Build the src.rpm: rpmbuild -bs --nodeps xxx.spec 2. Examine and process the src.rpm: rpm -q --qf "[%{EXCLUSIVEARCH}]\n" xxx.src.rpm Process the returned result and feed it into bugzilla. > > > to iterate through > > > all *.specs or srpms and update such bugzilla PRs automatically. > > > > Update??? A bug only should be filed once when the > > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch is added -- in most cases this will > > during/after review. > > Doesn't suffice. Imagine an upstream upgrade can be built for all > archs. Who looks up the tracker tickets in bugzilla? Imagine the opposite: A package that once had been buildable for several architectures, out of a sudden only builds for a subset of archs (e.g. due to an arch-specific bug in GCC). Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 29 19:03:13 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:03:13 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138561393.3594.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 12:31 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-ppc Okay guys, could someone post a proposal how to handle the whole ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch tracking in the future so FESCo can look at it and change the Package Review Guidelines accordingly? I really would prefer defined rules that are used in practice over civil disobedience ;-) CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 19:15:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:15:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291915.k0TJF2rh027751@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-29 14:14 EST ------- Not a review, but to attempt to restart discussion/interest. :) Package: - Builds ok on current devel error messages from tiger: 12:03> Checking password files... /bin/sort: invalid option -- 3 Try `/bin/sort --help' for more information. 12:03> Checking group files... /bin/sort: invalid option -- 3 Try `/bin/sort --help' for more information. 12:07> Checking for indications of break-in... /usr/bin/tail: cannot open `+2' for reading: No such file or directory Does the tiger.ignore file allow comments? If so, perhaps you could comment why each thing should be ignored? Ie, something like: # Fedora uses a "mail" group to allow some access to /var/spool/mail. Login ID mail's home directory \(/var/spool/mail\) has group `mail' write access. Is the package still being maintained? I don't see much activity on it's web site (no mailing list posts this year), etc. Or is development taking place only in debian? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Jochen at herr-schmitt.de Sun Jan 29 19:38:37 2006 From: Jochen at herr-schmitt.de (Jochen Schmitt) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:38:37 +0100 Subject: Take ownership of opanal Message-ID: <20060129193837.GA4757@myhome> Hello, I will inform anybody on this list, that I will take the owneership of openal becouse blender will depend on it. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -------------- 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 Sun Jan 29 19:41:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:41:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179276] New: Request for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras 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=179276 Summary: Request for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras Product: Fedora Extras Version: 4 Platform: i386 URL: http://linux-ntfs.org OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: snecklifter at gmail.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com >From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.0.7-1.1.fc4 Firefox/1.0.7 Description of problem: Hello, This request is made on behalf of the linux-ntfs project listed at the above URL. Yes, I am fully aware of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems and the statement regarding inclusion of the ntfs driver in Core. Before this request is turned down outright could everyone please consider the following: 1. RHEL and Fedora are the last remaining distribution/s not to include the NTFS driver. Does the lack of legal action against other distributions not set a legal precedent? 2. Inclusion of the NTFS kernel module in Extras would surely shift some burden of responsibility from RH and leave the decision of NTFS support in the users hands, whilst providing an easier route through default YUM repos to getting that support should it be required. ie. RH/Fedora are not shipping support in Core and therefore distancing themselves a little from any concerns they may have. Fundamentally, can this be considered an acceptable compromise? 3. An awful lot of time (developer time) is spent packaging RPMS - if buildsys can handle this then they can get on with more important stuff. Hint, hint, write support, hint, hint. I realise this is not the reason the RFC was published however I recognised the opportunity when it arose and as a boundary to cross-platform compatibility for users migrating I feel this alterative to straight kernel inclusion should be given some serious thought. In answer to the other questions, this would be GPL and obviously the reason it is not in mainline (Fedora mainline that is) is for those mentioned numerous times previously. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): kernel-module-ntfs-$(uname -r) How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: See above. Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Sun Jan 29 19:53:12 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:53:12 +0200 Subject: Take ownership of opanal In-Reply-To: <20060129193837.GA4757@myhome> References: <20060129193837.GA4757@myhome> Message-ID: <1138564392.7167.67.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 20:38 +0100, Jochen Schmitt wrote: > I will inform anybody on this list, that I will take the owneership of openal > becouse blender will depend on it. Have you discussed this with the package's current owner? As far as I can tell, openal is no longer orphaned. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 19:59:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:59:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175551] Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601291959.k0TJxfn3000701@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175551 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-01-29 14:59 EST ------- To clarify, the use of the Debian archive because it has the latest 1.2? Good: - rpmlint checks clean - 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 FC4 i386 - 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 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 fedora at camperquake.de Sun Jan 29 20:05:59 2006 From: fedora at camperquake.de (Ralf Ertzinger) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:05:59 +0100 Subject: Take ownership of opanal In-Reply-To: <1138564392.7167.67.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> References: <20060129193837.GA4757@myhome> <1138564392.7167.67.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: <20060129210559.18b54f84@lain> Hi. > Have you discussed this with the package's current owner? As far as I > can tell, openal is no longer orphaned. Quick! Someone devise an elaborate locking scheme to prevent this in the future :) From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 20:03:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:03:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175551] Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292003.k0TK3C1G001079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175551 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|jpmahowald at gmail.com |ed at eh3.com ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 15:02 EST ------- Hi Patrice, I think this is a candidate for the simplest and smallest package submitted to Fedora Extras. And it looks like you've done it correctly: + source matches upstream + very simple (almost trivial) package + spec looks clean & good -- no obvious errors + builds on FC4 + rpmlint reports no errors or warnings + license is correct and correctly included so its 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 Sun Jan 29 20:08:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:08:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175551] Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292008.k0TK8pLb001622@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175551 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 15:08 EST ------- Hi John, you beat me to it by a few minutes so you clearly get credit for the review here. And I apologize for hitting the "submit anyway" button without paying closer attention to what was going on. I've re-assigned the bug back to you so it should be un-done. And, anyway, its nice to see that we agree... :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 20:17:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:17:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292017.k0TKHvx0002554@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |kevin at tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-29 15:17 EST ------- Here's a review: MUST items: OK Package name. OK Spec file name. OK License good (GPL). OK License in spec matches. OK License is included (GPL COPYING) OK Spec english/readable OK Sources match upstream (md5: 031756ff6c7084a139dc9550a27f6906) OK No packages in BR that are in the exceptions list. OK Correctly uses find_lang OK No dynamic libs, so no ldconfig needed. OK Builds on fc4. OK No rpmlint output (on fc4 build). Good! OK Package owns all it's created directories. OK No duplicate files in files section. OK Permissions look good. OK Clean section looks good. OK desktop file looks good and good install. OK Runs fine on my fc4 machine. ISSUES: 1. Doesn't build in current devel/mock. It has two unavailable BuildRequires: No Package Found for w3c-libwww-devel >= 0:5.3.2 No Package Found for XFree86-devel The w3c-libwww package no longer seems available in core in devel/fc5. XFree86-devel has been replaced with modular xorg packages. You may need to create and import a w3c-libwww package before this one if that support is needed by this package. Can you see if that support is optional, and/or some new package now provides that support for fc5? Also, if you could review/comment on some other in review packages to show your understanding of the package guidelines, that would assist in deciding to sponsor you. ;) You can find a list in bugzilla at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/showdependencytree.cgi?id=FE-REVIEW&hide_resolved=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 Sun Jan 29 20:21:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:21:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175980] Review Request: w3c-libwww In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292021.k0TKLL1s002944@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175980 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 2006-01-29 15:21 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 178310 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 20:21:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:21:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292021.k0TKLdw1003050@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dcantrel at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-29 15:21 EST ------- *** Bug 175980 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 Sun Jan 29 20:22:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:22:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292022.k0TKMVJv003227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |178310 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-01-29 15:22 EST ------- w3c-libwww is bug 178310 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jochen at herr-schmitt.de Sun Jan 29 20:54:11 2006 From: jochen at herr-schmitt.de (jochen at herr-schmitt.de) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:54:11 +0100 Subject: AW: openal is not orphaned Message-ID: <9606040.82851138568051398.JavaMail.servlet@kundenserver> >Hash: SHA1 > Have you discussed this with the package's current owner? As far as I > can tell, openal is no longer orphaned. Thank you for your mail. This was a mistake from me. I have wrote a apologize to the package owner and revoke the changes to owners.list. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD3SreT2AHK6txfgwRAklNAJ9smy+pjX3aLEiG3JzpWC+kzcC5GwCgvbCw P+8ybhQDhlPMzjM/gSg9awQ= =KK0g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 21:13:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:13:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292113.k0TLDAIV008283@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 16:12 EST ------- Hi Orion, I don't have an FC5 system running at the moment to test whether the ncarg binaries segfault or not. So I'll have to skip that part of the review for now. In any case, here are the parts that I could do: good: + source matches upstream + specfile is legible + license is ok and correctly included + builds in mock FC5 i386 + code not content -- although it apparently contains some basic map, font (?), etc. data for creating the graphics + dir ownership and permissions looks OK + no shared libs and no *.la files needswork: - please add an "unset NCARG" at the end of %build - please consider using Chris Chabot's suggestion in comment #4 - rpmlint emits a few warnings/errors: OK to ignore: E: ncarg script-without-shellbang /etc/profile.d/ncarg.csh E: ncarg script-without-shellbang /etc/profile.d/ncarg.sh W: ncarg-devel no-documentation Please put all the tutorial bits (/usr/lib/ncarg/tutorial/) in the -devel package or perhaps in a -doc package: W: ncarg devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ncarg/tutorial/c_colcon.c Probably, this should go in the devel package since I don't think it gets used via any run-time (eg. plug-in) methods. Or does it? W: ncarg devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ncarg/graphcaps/aed.a - please put all the /usr/lib/lib*.a files in /usr/lib/ncarg/ so that they don't pollute the /usr/lib/ namespace with generic names - please have the devel package require the main package: "Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 21:32:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175551] Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292132.k0TLWBJi010218@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asa - Convert Fortran carriage control characters https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175551 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-29 16:31 EST ------- I used the 1.2 from debian as I couldn't find it anywhere else and it has some fixes with regard with 1.1, especially in the Makefile. This is my first doubly approved package. Maybe because it is such a complex 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 Jan 29 21:41:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:41:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292141.k0TLfYJ3011277@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 16:41 EST ------- Hi Shawn, I started to review this package and the first thing I noticed was a mismatch between the upstream libgeotiff-1.2.2.tar.gz file and the one provided by the SRPM. It seems that the actual contents of the two tar files are the same (zero diff on two directores they create) so perhaps one is simply more compressed (gzip -9) than the other? Or maybe the upstream changed? In any case, please produce a new SRPM with an exact match (md5sum) to the upstream "tarball" since most folks consider that to be a review prerequisite. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 21:43:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:43:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174494] Review Request: libopensync-plugin-irmc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292143.k0TLhMHl011398@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libopensync-plugin-irmc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174494 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-29 16:43 EST ------- Fixed :) http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/libopensync-plugin-irmc-0.18-2.src.rpm http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/libopensync-plugin-irmc.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 Sun Jan 29 21:49:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:49:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177083] Review Request: xmldiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292149.k0TLnnSO012068@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmldiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177083 stickster at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From stickster at gmail.com 2006-01-29 16:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > And btw: A simple google search shows that other distributions were able to > > get it running on x86_64 so it's probably not that hard to fix > > Well, many people and distributions often don't run test suites during builds > and sometimes ship plain broken packages :). I haven't checked if that's the > case here. The only 0.6.7 packages I found did not run the test suites, so they wouldn't have seen this problem. If anyone would like to give substantive direction on fixing the problem, that would be appreciated. I found only the following regarding x86_64 related issues: http://lists.logilab.org/pipermail/xml-projects/2005-June/000372.html > > people interested in x86_64 > > practically had no chance to look at this problem and help fixing before the > > package was pushed. That not how it should work IMHO. > > Agreed. I was unpleasantly surprised to see this pushed with ExcludeArch and > "build good" comment about two hours after my "...if you end up needing to > exclude x86_64..." comment. Sorry about the early push; I was in the middle of many other tasks that day and forgot that this one should have percolated for a while. For some reason, I thought failed builds went to the list, but I see that I was mistaken. (That was why the package languished originally -- to allow time for comment.) Since the package does work on i386 and ppc, once I have help with the x86_64 problem, I can add the patch and make a new release. So in summary, does this plan suffice?: 1. File bug as noted above, attaching build.log and blocking this bug and "FE-ExcludeArch-x64" 2. Note number in an additional comment in this bug, since this one is referenced in %changelog in xmldiff package currently, per Ville's request earlier 3. Send email to f-extras-l requesting x86_64 assistance (e.g. Hans?), referencing new bug 4. Fix problem, test and package new release -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 21:51:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:51:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178263] Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292151.k0TLpaEu012269@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ncarg - A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178263 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wart at kobold.org ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 16:51 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Hi Orion, I don't have an FC5 system running at the moment to test > whether the ncarg binaries segfault or not. I was able to verify that some of the examples from ncargex in X11 mode (-W 8) run on FC5 without crashing. > needswork: > - please add an "unset NCARG" at the end of %build Why bother? The %build and %install scripts are run as separate shell scripts, so environment settings don't carry from one to the other AFAIK. > Please put all the tutorial bits (/usr/lib/ncarg/tutorial/) > in the -devel package or perhaps in a -doc package: On a related note, it appears that ncargex, in the base package, requires the example files in the ncarg-devel package. Perhaps the ncargex package could be moved to the -devel package, or as Ed suggests, move it all to a -doc 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 Jan 29 22:18:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:18:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179202] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292218.k0TMIgJ5014721@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-screenshooter-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179202 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ed at eh3.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 17:18 EST ------- Hi Christoph, I can't find anything wrong with it: + source matches upstream + license is ok and properly included + specfile looks clean -- no obvious errors + builds on FC4 i386 + rpmlint reports no warnings or errors + lib is a plug-in and handled correctly + ownership and permissions look good + works -- no segfaults on FC4 i386 system so its 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 Sun Jan 29 22:42:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:42:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177827] Review Request: python-ctypes - Advanced Foreign Function Interface for Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292242.k0TMgXra017346@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-01-29 17:42 EST ------- Hi Konstantin, I tried to download the SRPM but the machine doesn't fully respond. Running wget results in an indefinite wait. The machine is ping-able though, so its at least plugged in... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 29 22:47:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:47:33 +0100 Subject: Take ownership of opanal In-Reply-To: <20060129210559.18b54f84@lain> References: <20060129193837.GA4757@myhome> <1138564392.7167.67.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <20060129210559.18b54f84@lain> Message-ID: <20060129234733.0dbea09c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:05:59 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote: > Hi. > > > Have you discussed this with the package's current owner? As far as I > > can tell, openal is no longer orphaned. > > Quick! Someone devise an elaborate locking scheme to prevent this in the > future :) Uhm, if owners.list doesn't list the package owner as being extras-orphan at fedoraproject.org and if the Wiki page doesn't list the package as being orphaned either, it is extremely bad form to perform sort of a "hostile take-over" without mentioning in the CVS commit comment that this is in accordance with the current package owner. : -Fedora Extras|openal|Open Audio Library|andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| : +Fedora Extras|openal|Open Audio Library|andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de|Jochen at herr-schmitt.de| The fourth field is the package owner, not the fifth field. The 5th field is a placeholder QA address. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 29 23:38:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:38:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601292338.k0TNci6m023429@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 18:38 EST ------- Can't connect to host when I tried to download the files. Do you have somewhere else where they can be found? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 00:13:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:13:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300013.k0U0DMWG027318@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ------- Additional Comments From ianburrell at gmail.com 2006-01-29 19:13 EST ------- I modified the spec to remove the duplicate BuildRequires. Removing XFree86-devel means the same spec builds on devel after the w3c-libwwww-devel in 178310 is installed. I added a patch to build on gcc 4.1. Spec: http://znark.com/fedora/extras/jigdo.spec SRPM: http://znark.com/fedora/extras/jigdo-0.7.2-2.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 Mon Jan 30 00:20:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:20:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177104] Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300020.k0U0K3tO028332@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 19:19 EST ------- This isn't a formal review because I can't sponsor you, but here are a couple of comments on the spec file: * Consider if you want to use %{?dist} in the release line. It's optional, but many packagers find it useful. This can also be added after importing into CVS. * Please use the recommended value for BuildRoot per the packaging guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines * Don't add the check for "/" in %clean. Just remove $RPM_BUILD_ROOT with no checks. The BuildRoot: setting ensures that it won't be "/". * rpmlint warnings: W: abook non-standard-group Networking/Mail Applications/Internet or Applications/Productivity might be more appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 00:36:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:36:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179202] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300036.k0U0aH9c030304@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-screenshooter-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179202 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-01-29 19:36 EST ------- 3437 (xfce4-screenshooter-plugin): Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/3437-xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.fc5/ 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 Jan 30 00:37:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300037.k0U0btpb030521@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ianburrell at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ianburrell at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From ianburrell at gmail.com 2006-01-29 19:37 EST ------- Review: OK Package name OK Spec file name OK License good (BSD-style) OK License in spec matches. OK License is included OK Spec english/readable OK Source match upstream (md5sum: c3734ca6caa405707e134cc8c6d7e422) OK No packages in BR that are in the exceptions list. OK No locale string or desktop files OK Post scripts call ldconfig OK Builds on devel OK Installs and runs on devel OK Package owns all it's created directories. OK Permissions look good. OK Clean section looks good. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 00:42:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:42:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173499] Review Request: lagan: Local, global, and multiple alignment of DNA sequences In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300042.k0U0g91J030894@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lagan: Local, global, and multiple alignment of DNA sequences https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173499 Christian.Iseli at licr.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-01-29 19:42 EST ------- Thanks for the review. I agree the code is pretty dirty and lots of warnings remain. I'll see what I can do. I've replaced _libexecdir with _libdir and rpmlint is now quiet. I've redone the patch to kill all LAGAN_DIR occurences and related error messages. Imported and built, so I'm closing the ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 00:56:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:56:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177580] Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300056.k0U0uPkH032413@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 19:56 EST ------- This isn't a formal review because I can't sponsor you, but just a few comments from browsing the spec file: * In %install and %clean, don't add the check for "/". The use of BuildRoot: ensures that it won't delete your entire hard drive. * Add a period at the end of the %description. * Include the full URL to the Source: archive, not just the filename. The Url: tag should be the Url to the package's home page, not the source tarball. * Consider using %{?dist} in the Release: tag. Many packagers find it useful. * A couple of warnings appeared during the build that caused some missing file errors; it looks like something wasn't obeying $(DESTDIR) in the Makefile. scrollkeeper-update -p /var/tmp/lat-0.8.2-root/var/scrollkeeper -o /var/tmp/lat-0.8.2-root/usr/share/omf/lat Cannot stat file: /usr/share/gnome/help/lat/C/lat.xml : No such file or directory Cannot write to log file: /var/log/scrollkeeper.log : Permission denied Cannot write to log file: /var/log/scrollkeeper.log : Permission denied ... error: File not found: /var/tmp/lat-0.8.2-root/var/scrollkeeper/index/0 error: File not found: /var/tmp/lat-0.8.2-root/var/scrollkeeper/TOC/0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 02:04:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:04:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300204.k0U24Qwl006782@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-29 21:04 EST ------- MUST items: * rpmlint output is clean * package and spec name matches upstream * GPL license valid, matches upstream, license file included * Meets packaging guidelines * Spec file is legible and in Am. English. * Source matches upstream (md5sum ok) * Builds cleanly on FC5 i386 * Valid BR; none are redundant * No lang files; no shlibs. * Package not relocatable * 0wns all directories that it creates * File permissions ok * %clean looks good * code, not content * minimal doc files, do not affect runtime * no -devel package necessary * desktop file installed correctly SHOULD items: * package includes license fie - mock build not tested, but did build fine on FC5. * Package runs and causes loss of productivity. :) MUSTFIX: * typo in the Summary: 'may' -> 'many' * Leave out the phrase "Quoting from the webpage" from the description. It seems excessive. SHOULDFIX (won't block approval): * consider splitting the data files and the program into separate packages. This will allow you to make smaller updates to fix problems with the code without requiring users to download the unchanged data files again (~135k vs. 635k download) Since there have been no addtional comments about the use of %{_bindir} in the pre/post scripts, and since they match the guidelines, I'm willing to leave them as-is. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 cypherpunks.ca Mon Jan 30 02:39:02 2006 From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 03:39:02 +0100 (CET) Subject: Some comments about FE-ACCEPT'ed packages (fwd) Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > We have 11 accepted, open package reviews where the package > appears to already be in the repo... > > All open packages already available: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=166207,166251,166252,166253,166254,168905,171334,171336,176618,177038,177166 Oops. I resolved two of mine. Paul -- "Happiness is never grand" --- Mustapha Mond, World Controller (Brave New World) From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Jan 30 04:49:47 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:49:47 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138561393.3594.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138561393.3594.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138596587.14256.62.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 20:03 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 12:31 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-ppc > > Okay guys, could someone post a proposal how to handle the whole > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch tracking in the future so FESCo can look at it > and change the Package Review Guidelines accordingly? I really would > prefer defined rules that are used in practice over civil > disobedience ;-) Packages that don't build for certain archs due to build problems simply are bugged. IMO, the appropriate means to handle such cases would be filing individual PRs. I.e. filing them under "package:xyz arch:foo" should be sufficient. If you really want something centralized, add a Bugzilla keywords, bugzilla queries could use, but am having doubts on if this would be useful at all. Packages for which "Exclusive/ExcludeArch" is a feature, aren't bugged, therefore I don't see any need to file a PR on them at all. If you want a list/table of "non-general packages", a script could extract this info from *.src.rpms (E.g. the buildsys could do this, when shifting a package from "needssign" to "release"). Whether to feed bugzilla with this info is arguable, automatically feeding a Wiki might be more appropriate. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 06:38:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:38:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300638.k0U6ct6t002617@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 dragoran at feuerpokemon.de 2006-01-30 01:38 EST ------- (In reply to comment #206) > The Fedorized alsasound.i I submitted unfortunately does not solve the problem > of the sound devices occasionally not being created. I was too hasty. I really > don't understand what is going on. > > Turning on logging in udev did not reveal anything. udevd simply does not seem > to receive the required events. > > I will stop looking at initng for a while. > > this can happen if udev needs to much time to start and alsasound get started before udev finished... does alsasound depend on udev? if not I think it should. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 07:14:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 02:14:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601300714.k0U7EArS006247@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-30 02:14 EST ------- Thanks for reviewing. MUSTFIX: fixed SHOULDFIX: I see your rationale, but make install depends on the data being there, so the only way todo this is make this a subpackage and if I then rebuild it to fix a bug in the engine the sub-package will get a version bump also. Or I should /could change the Makefile. Concidering the amount of work to create a seperate date src.rpm, the little gain (only 0.5 Mb on many Mb's of updates / day) and taking into account that I don't plan todo updates frequently I'll just keep it as one big package for now. I've attached a the new spec and a diff to the previous version, I can't upload because I'm not behind my home PC and my ISP only allows ftp access to my homepage from my home PC (GRRR). Message-ID: <200601300715.k0U7FOVR006425@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-01-30 02:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #207) > this can happen if udev needs to much time to start and alsasound get started > before udev finished... > does alsasound depend on udev? if not I think it should. There is also a problem in 0.5.3 which makes system/udev/filldev sometimes finish without really being finished. I've done a little loop in svn that kicks in right after udevstart and that doesn't let filldev finish until /dev/.udev/queue is empty. This fixed things for me, lets hope it fixes other small bugs like this as well... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 30 10:46:36 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:46:36 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138596587.14256.62.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138561393.3594.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138596587.14256.62.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1138617996.4435.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Montag, den 30.01.2006, 05:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 20:03 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 12:31 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > > > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-ppc > > > > Okay guys, could someone post a proposal how to handle the whole > > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch tracking in the future so FESCo can look at it > > and change the Package Review Guidelines accordingly? I really would > > prefer defined rules that are used in practice over civil > > disobedience ;-) > Packages that don't build for certain archs due to build problems simply > are bugged. > > IMO, the appropriate means to handle such cases would be filing > individual PRs. I.e. filing them under "package:xyz arch:foo" should be > sufficient. > > If you really want something centralized, add a Bugzilla keywords, > bugzilla queries could use, but am having doubts on if this would be > useful at all. Why Bugzilla keywords? We use the tracker bugs for many other things already and people in Core and Extras probably are used to it. And where is the difference between adding "FE-ExcludeArch-ppc" in the "Blocks Bug:" field to adding it after "Keywords:"? I can't see any notable. > Packages for which "Exclusive/ExcludeArch" is a feature, aren't bugged, > therefore I don't see any need to file a PR on them at all. > > If you want a list/table of "non-general packages", Yes, I think we should have one somewhere. We had one in the wiki in the past but it it was dropped because people preferred to have it in bugzilla. Now other people don't want it in bugzilla :-| > a script could > extract this info from *.src.rpms (E.g. the buildsys could do this, when > shifting a package from "needssign" to "release"). Whether to feed > bugzilla with this info is arguable, automatically feeding a Wiki might > be more appropriate. Well, a quick grep trough the devel checkout showed 46 packages that currently have ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch. For some of them the bugs are already filed. Some of those are probably in the category "ExcludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it" and have no bugs yet. I think round about 20 of these 46 are "ExcludeArch because a package is for certain archs only" and have no bug yet -- reporting bugs for them is a job that can be done in round about 30-60 minutes (heck, this whole discussion took longer already). Writing the script takes longer afaics. Both need a bit care later. Just my 2 cent. -- Thorsten Leemhuis From giallu at gmail.com Mon Jan 30 10:53:15 2006 From: giallu at gmail.com (Gianluca Sforna) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:53:15 +0100 Subject: rdiff-backup for FC3 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910601271459t5449c454j994c370ffb1f0800@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 1/27/06, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > FC3 has entered maintainence mode with the release of FC5test2. > There is no policy for Fedora Extras that requires maintainers to > supply packages for Core releases that have entered maintainence mode. > If the original maintainer doesn't want the burden of keeping FC3 > updated now that its in maintainence mode, another maintainer may need > to express interest in supplying those updates. > I am aware of that; I was only asking because AFAICT the last update was issued well before FC5test2 without an apparent reason to exclude FC3. Maybe the packager had not any FC3 machine around to test it, so I am just stating it works also on FC3. Thanks a lot giallu From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 12:05:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 07:05:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301205.k0UC5w2I015476@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-30 07:05 EST ------- > The list of groups used in FC-4 is nearly twice as long Doesn't say anything about whether it might be even more out-of-date or better to choose from. Unless FC offers a well-maintained list of official groups, the RPM Group tag is only old cruft which doesn't permit good and convenient classification of packages into groups. It seems to me some packagers have made up their own groups without adhering to any existing tree-like structure, creating new branches only if old branches become too crowded. E.g. Text Processing/Markup/XML is used, but "Text Processing" and "Text Processing/Markup" are not. This is a questionable decision. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 14:01:12 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:01:12 +0100 Subject: New tracker bugs for the use of ExcludeArchs in packages In-Reply-To: <1138617996.4435.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1138534273.2849.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138561393.3594.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138596587.14256.62.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1138617996.4435.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1138629672.5149.26.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 11:46 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Montag, den 30.01.2006, 05:49 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 20:03 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2006, 12:31 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > > > > > > > Just FYI, I created several new tracker bugs: > > > > > > > > 179258 - FE-ExcludeArch-x86 > > > > 179259 - FE-ExcludeArch-x64 > > > > 179260 - FE-ExcludeArch-ppc > > > > > > Okay guys, could someone post a proposal how to handle the whole > > > ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch tracking in the future so FESCo can look at it > > > and change the Package Review Guidelines accordingly? I really would > > > prefer defined rules that are used in practice over civil > > > disobedience ;-) > > Packages that don't build for certain archs due to build problems simply > > are bugged. > > > > IMO, the appropriate means to handle such cases would be filing > > individual PRs. I.e. filing them under "package:xyz arch:foo" should be > > sufficient. > > > > If you really want something centralized, add a Bugzilla keywords, > > bugzilla queries could use, but am having doubts on if this would be > > useful at all. > > Why Bugzilla keywords? It's an alternative, easier to use if chasing specific issues. > We use the tracker bugs for many other things > already and people in Core and Extras probably are used to it. IMO, "tracker bugs" are the means of choice for dependencies, e.g. a bug in one package blocking others from upgrading. > And where > is the difference between adding "FE-ExcludeArch-ppc" in the "Blocks > Bug:" field to adding it after "Keywords:"? I can't see any notable. ExcludeA* are a bug's feature/attribute (Actually a band-aid to work around a deficit inside of a package), not a dependency. An arch-specific bug in GCC, preventing a package from being upgraded would be a dependency. > > Packages for which "Exclusive/ExcludeArch" is a feature, aren't bugged, > > therefore I don't see any need to file a PR on them at all. > > > > If you want a list/table of "non-general packages", > > Yes, I think we should have one somewhere. We had one in the wiki in the > past but it it was dropped because people preferred to have it in > bugzilla. Now other people don't want it in bugzilla :-| Well, could have been me, who said that. IMO, bugzilla is a bug tracking system, and should be applied as such. What Fedora actually needs is a "package status/tracking system", presenting a summary and status in a nicely written, simple web package (Something similar to the Debian devel packages). > > a script could > > extract this info from *.src.rpms (E.g. the buildsys could do this, when > > shifting a package from "needssign" to "release"). Whether to feed > > bugzilla with this info is arguable, automatically feeding a Wiki might > > be more appropriate. > > Well, a quick grep trough the devel checkout showed 46 packages that > currently have ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch. For some of them the bugs > are already filed. Some of those are probably in the category > "ExcludeArch because the packager was not able to fix it" and have no > bugs yet. > I think round about 20 of these 46 are "ExcludeArch because a package is > for certain archs only" and have no bug yet -- reporting bugs for them > is a job that can be done in round about 30-60 minutes (heck, this whole > discussion took longer already). Writing the script takes longer afaics. > Both need a bit care later. That's what I thought. Somebody, who has a fully checked out CVS or (IMO preferable) a complete local copy of the FE SRPMS, could easily write a script and feed a wiki on a, say weekly or daily, basis (No I can't do this, I don't have the bandwidth required for keeping my SRPMS current). Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 15:11:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:11:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175899] Review Request: perl-DBD-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301511.k0UFBicS011556@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175899 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |paul at city-fan.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-30 10:11 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is same as perl, matches spec - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds OK on FC4 (i386) and in mock for rawhide (i386) - BR's 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 entry needed - no scriptlets 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 Jan 30 15:18:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:18:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301518.k0UFIncX013000@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-30 10:18 EST ------- I'm not sure how your comments relate to the review of the swaks package. Are you contesting the choice of the Applications/Internet group? If so, please feel free to suggest something more appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 15:50:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:50:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301550.k0UFoV1F021767@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2006-01-30 10:50 EST ------- Thinking about this more: this file %{_var}/lib/pear/DB.xml is just static, right? Or does it change? If it doesn't change it should be in %{_libdir}/php/pear/ instead, or something. We can have php-pear own the containing directory once it is decided, either way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 15:53:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:53:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176733] Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301553.k0UFriEn022638@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176733 Bug 176733 depends on bug 178821, which changed state. Bug 178821 Summary: php-pear is missing Require on php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178821 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE 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 Mon Jan 30 16:31:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:31:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601301631.k0UGVM3r030908@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 world.root at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |world.root at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From world.root at gmail.com 2006-01-30 11:31 EST ------- Hi Anthony ! Nice work you're doing... If possible, I would like to make an Azureus gcj source package based on your ideas, and contribute it to gentoo linux. I hope I'm not too off-topic on this bug.. Usually, a gentoo package (ebuild) is specified in terms of compilation, installation and dependencies, listed inside a bash script. What method would you recommend to get the latest Azureus source built using gcj ? Is extensive patching needed ? What dependencies would I need to gcj-compile too ? Btw, for maintenance and gentoo's java policy reasons, I would prefer to use the original Azureus source and patch it on the fly, if possible.. Thanks in advance ! Jo?l -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From qspencer at ieee.org Mon Jan 30 16:49:54 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:49:54 -0600 Subject: Anyone seen this error? Message-ID: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> I recently received a bug report that one of my packages (in devel) fails when built in mock with the following error: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/info/dir I was able to duplicate this in a mock build, but here's what I don't understand: after the build failure, I don't see a "dir" file in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/info . Furthermore, if I try the same build on a (mostly) up to date devel system, the build completes without any problems. Why? In looking at other packages that I maintain, one that was formerly in core has the line rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_infodir}/dir in the %install section. That seems like what I need to fix this problem, but it also seems like an ugly hack to deal with a problem that a lot of packages are likely to have and IMHO maybe should be handled by the rpm tools automatically. Is there a better way to do this? -Quentin From dragoran at feuerpokemon.de Mon Jan 30 17:04:07 2006 From: dragoran at feuerpokemon.de (dragoran) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:04:07 +0100 Subject: extras package that require changes in selinux-policy (initng) Message-ID: <43DE4707.9010900@feuerpokemon.de> Hello. I am working on selinux support in initng, which is in review for extras now [1]. But it seems that initng requires a policy to work (just tested in targeted mode) Using the default context (sbin_t) lets all apps that are started from initng run as kernel_t. Relabling /sbin/initng to init_exec_t (same as init) fixes this and the processes run as init_t and udev_t for udev, but some issues still remain. hald,httpd, etc. also run as init_t which is *wrong* they have to get into their own domain. How is this handled in sysvinit? After reading the code I havn't found anything about it. The patch I wrote can be found here: http://bugzilla.initng.thinktux.net/show_bug.cgi?id=365 Did I do something wrong? Did I miss something? After fixing this we will run into an other problem. Every time the filesystem gots relabled initng will become sbin_t which will break it. To fix this we need to modify the selinux-policy. What should be done if a package in extras requires to change a core package? Should I just fill a bug against it and hope that it will be released as an update for FC4, and gets into rawhide too? Was unable to find anything about it in the wiki. 1: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Jan 30 17:21:59 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:21:59 +0100 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> Message-ID: <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:49:54 -0600, Quentin Spencer wrote: > I recently received a bug report that one of my packages (in devel) > fails when built in mock with the following error: > > error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: > /usr/share/info/dir > > I was able to duplicate this in a mock build, but here's what I don't > understand: after the build failure, I don't see a "dir" file in > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/info . Furthermore, if I try the same build on > a (mostly) up to date devel system, the build completes without any > problems. Why? In looking at other packages that I maintain, one that > was formerly in core has the line > > rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_infodir}/dir > > in the %install section. When building as "root", the "dir" file is created. Else, not. From qspencer at ieee.org Mon Jan 30 17:31:35 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:31:35 -0600 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: >On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:49:54 -0600, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > > >>I recently received a bug report that one of my packages (in devel) >>fails when built in mock with the following error: >> >>error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >> /usr/share/info/dir >> >>I was able to duplicate this in a mock build, but here's what I don't >>understand: after the build failure, I don't see a "dir" file in >>$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/info . Furthermore, if I try the same build on >>a (mostly) up to date devel system, the build completes without any >>problems. Why? In looking at other packages that I maintain, one that >>was formerly in core has the line >> >>rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_infodir}/dir >> >>in the %install section. >> >> > >When building as "root", the "dir" file is created. Else, not. > > Thanks, that explains a lot. This error has started appearing recently in two of my packages, which previously built fine in mock. Is this due to changes in mock? Is this a bug? -Quentin From rdieter at math.unl.edu Mon Jan 30 17:36:18 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:36:18 -0600 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> Message-ID: Quentin Spencer wrote: >>> error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >>> /usr/share/info/dir ... > Thanks, that explains a lot. This error has started appearing recently > in two of my packages, which previously built fine in mock. Is this due > to changes in mock? Is this a bug? Not too long ago, mock failed to properly check for unpackaged files. That seems to have been fixed. -- Rex From dcbw at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 17:37:14 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:37:14 -0500 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> Message-ID: <1138642635.12551.9.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Quentin Spencer wrote: > > >>> error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: > >>> /usr/share/info/dir > ... > > Thanks, that explains a lot. This error has started appearing recently > > in two of my packages, which previously built fine in mock. Is this due > > to changes in mock? Is this a bug? > > Not too long ago, mock failed to properly check for unpackaged files. > That seems to have been fixed. I updated the builders to the fixed version of mock late last week. Dan From qspencer at ieee.org Mon Jan 30 17:47:43 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:47:43 -0600 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <1138642635.12551.9.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> <1138642635.12551.9.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <43DE513F.4000907@ieee.org> Dan Williams wrote: >On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > >>Quentin Spencer wrote: >> >> >> >>>>>error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >>>>> /usr/share/info/dir >>>>> >>>>> >>... >> >> >>>Thanks, that explains a lot. This error has started appearing recently >>>in two of my packages, which previously built fine in mock. Is this due >>>to changes in mock? Is this a bug? >>> >>> >>Not too long ago, mock failed to properly check for unpackaged files. >>That seems to have been fixed. >> >> > >I updated the builders to the fixed version of mock late last week. > > OK, so I guess I have to change my spec files to deal with this. However, the underlying reason this error has come up is that mock is apparently building in a pseudo root environment. Since packages should be able to be built without being root, it seems like it would be more correct for mock to emulate a user environment. Wouldn't that prevent /usr/share/info/dir from being created in the first place? I'm sorry if I'm completely misunderstanding mock here. -Quentin From paul at city-fan.org Mon Jan 30 18:23:06 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:23:06 +0000 Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <43DE513F.4000907@ieee.org> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> <20060130182159.5a8348c7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <43DE4D77.9030000@ieee.org> <1138642635.12551.9.camel@dhcp83-115.boston.redhat.com> <43DE513F.4000907@ieee.org> Message-ID: <43DE598A.2040507@city-fan.org> Quentin Spencer wrote: > Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: >> >> >>> Quentin Spencer wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>>> error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >>>>>> /usr/share/info/dir >>>>>> >>> >>> ... >>> >>> >>>> Thanks, that explains a lot. This error has started appearing >>>> recently in two of my packages, which previously built fine in mock. >>>> Is this due to changes in mock? Is this a bug? >>>> >>> >>> Not too long ago, mock failed to properly check for unpackaged files. >>> That seems to have been fixed. >>> >> >> >> I updated the builders to the fixed version of mock late last week. >> >> > > OK, so I guess I have to change my spec files to deal with this. > However, the underlying reason this error has come up is that mock is > apparently building in a pseudo root environment. Since packages should > be able to be built without being root, it seems like it would be more > correct for mock to emulate a user environment. Wouldn't that prevent > /usr/share/info/dir from being created in the first place? I'm sorry if > I'm completely misunderstanding mock here. I think the situation is that /usr/share/info/dir is created if permissions allow it. A package build using root would obviously allow it, but so would a package build as a regular user using a buildroot. I think that the only reason that this is cropping up now is that rpmbuild's checks for unpackaged files have been turned on under mock. Paul. From meme at DaughtersOfTiresias.org Mon Jan 30 20:08:46 2006 From: meme at DaughtersOfTiresias.org (Karen Pease) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:08:46 -0600 Subject: magic file / invalid type 20 in mconvert()? Message-ID: <200601301408.46386.meme@DaughtersOfTiresias.org> I have absolutely no clue what this means. Doing a local "make i386" while attempting to solve a problem that used to just manifest on the plague servers: Executing(%doc): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.77844 + umask 022 + cd /home/meme/code/fedora/nethack-vultures/FC-3 + cd vultures-1.11.2 + DOCDIR=/var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/share/doc/nethack-vultures-1.11.2 + export DOCDIR + rm -rf /var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/share/doc/nethack-vultures-1.11.2 + /bin/mkdir -p /var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/share/doc/nethack-vultures-1.11.2 + cp -pr nethack/README nethack/dat/license nethack/dat/history nethack/dat/cmdhelp nethack/dat/help nethack/dat/opthelp nethack/dat/wizhelp /var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/share/doc/nethack-vultures-1.11.2 + cp -pr slashem/readme.txt slashem/history.txt slashem/slamfaq.txt vultures/gamedata/manual/ /var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/share/doc/nethack-vultures-1.11.2 + exit 0 error: magic_file(ms, "/var/tmp/nethack-vultures-1.11.2-3-root-meme/usr/games/vulturesclaw/Guidebook.txt") failed: invalid type 20 in mconvert() rpmbuild: rpmfc.c:1229: rpmfcClassify: Assertion `ftype != ((void *)0)' failed. make: *** [i386] Aborted I'm fairly new to the process of building RPMs for Fedora Extras. What does this even mean? - Karen From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 20:32:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:32:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302032.k0UKWSEe016280@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-30 15:32 EST ------- MUST items: * rpmlint output clean * Name matches upstream; spec file named appropriately * License (GPL) ok, license text included in %doc * Specfile is legible and in Am. English * Sources match upstream (md5sum ok) * Package compiles and builds on FC5 i386 * BuildRequires ok. * no -devel package * Minimal documentation ok. * No localized text * No shared libraries * Not relocatable * 0wns directories that it creates * No duplicate files * Permissions look ok * %clean and %install both remove $RPM_BUILD_ROOT * Contains code and permissible content (game data files) * desktop file ok. SHOULD items: * license file included - mock build fails on FC4 i386 (see comment #3) * Program runs. * scriptlets ok. NEEDSWORK: * Don't use first-person references in a description. Try something like this instead: "For too long has humanity been ruled by cruel and disputatious gods! Fly through the various layers of the Celestial Oversphere to unseat those who control the universe. In Overgod you control a little vehicle in the middle of the screen and fly around and shoot things - a bit like asteroids, but the asteroids move independently and shoot back. You can also upgrade your vehicle in various ways." As noted in comment #3, the package won't build on FC4. I'm assuming you are considering this package for FC5 only? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From triad at df.lth.se Mon Jan 30 20:40:41 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:40:41 +0100 (CET) Subject: Anyone seen this error? In-Reply-To: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> References: <43DE43B2.3040601@ieee.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Quentin Spencer wrote: > error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: > /usr/share/info/dir When info installs .info files somewhere it adds them to the pre-existing dir file, which is what info use to keep track of available info pages. If you install into some place where there is not previously a dir file, it is obviously created. Since this dir file is invalid (actually only listing your package, packaging it would overwrite the global dir file for the target system, no good), you need to remove it, as you do: > rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_infodir}/dir This is also the reason why the .info files have to be manually added to the texinfo database after install: Requires(post): /sbin/install-info Requires(preun): /sbin/install-info %post /sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/foo.info %{_infodir}/dir || : %preun if [ $1 = 0 ]; then # uninstall the info reference in the dir file /sbin/install-info --delete %{_infodir}/foo.info %{_infodir}/dir || : fi Just including the foo.info file (or foo.info.gz) in: %{_infodir}/*.info is not enough, of course. Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 20:40:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:40:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302040.k0UKeQYX017519@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-30 15:40 EST ------- I'll accept your reasoning for not splitting the data and source packages. Changes look good, except for the extra " at the end of %description. Fix that before you check it in. 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 Jan 30 20:49:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:49:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302049.k0UKn7ka018892@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-30 15:49 EST ------- Thanks for the review, I'll fix the description and post a new version tomorrow. About the building on FC-4, FC-5 is near so unless I get requests I'm not planning on an FC-4 release. If I get requests I'll file a bug against FC-4 allegro, as that needs fixing and/or updating for 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 qspencer at ieee.org Mon Jan 30 20:59:59 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:59:59 -0600 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <200601191836.43586.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601181104.06656.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43CEA82A.6050102@ieee.org> <200601191836.43586.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <43DE7E4F.2060406@ieee.org> On January 19, Jose' Matos wrote: >On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:42, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > >>> FWIW and being consistent with other recent changes the best move would >>>have been for fftw to have become fftw2 as soon as version 3 was declare >>>stable. >>> >>> >>I agree, but I introduced fftw3 because there was no interest on the >>part of the maintainer of fftw of moving to the 3.x releases. FWIW, >>Debian has a fftw3 package. >> >> > > I would like exceptions like this to be the exception and not the rule. ;-) > > > >>> All the development for this library is happening in version 3, where >>>release 3.1 is entering beta phase. >>> >>> So let us request the change, for you it should be enough to Obsolete >>>fftw3, no? >>> >>> Then we need to change accordingly the packages that require fftw to >>>require fftw2 and those requiring fftw3 to fftw. Since packages should >>>only build require the -devel version if we synchronize our releases all >>>will still work. >>> >>>Does this sounds like a plan? >>> >>> >>This seems reasonble. Currently, fftw3 is only in the FC-4 and devel >>branches. This is because the main reason I wanted it in Extras was for >>Octave, which was still in core for FC3. I don't see any particular need >>to change everything in FC-4, so maybe we just make the changes in devel >>so that they will be in place for FC-5? >> >> > > That seems fair, although I don't see any problem changing that to FC-4, >since that is the first version that we really control. Actually I like this >more but I am not dogmatic about it. :-) > > So the question remains, FC-4 or FC-5? > > The advantage of FC-4 is that it would allow us to carry the same spec file, >while FC-5 is not yet released. > > > >>If we were to make this change, here are the packages that require fftw: >>fftw-devel >>grace >> >>(It also appears glame on livna would be affected.) >> >> > > This will only affect new buildings, previous packages will work fine. > > We could contact as well other repositories about this change. It would be >nice. :-) > > > >>Here are the packages that currently require fftw3: >>fftw3-devel >>octave >>octave-forge >>osiv >>plplot-octave >> >>I maintain octave and octave-forge, and having looked at the others, it >>appears the plplot dependency is implicit, so the only other package >>needing an update is osiv. >> >> > > So it should be easy. :-) > > OK, sorry about the delay in responding. The new 3.1 release of fftw is out now, and I have checked the necessary changes for the fftw3 package into CVS, but I'm going to wait on requesting a build until we reach a final decision on this change. So, here's my proposal: we change both FC-4 and FC-5 branches, you take over the 2.x branch under whatever name you want (I assume you'll call it fftw2, but it also occured to me that we could call it compat-fftw2 or something like that--you're the maintainer so you can decide). I will take over fftw and update it to the new 3.1 release, and the fftw3 name will be abandoned. If you agree with this, go ahead and create the 2.x package and notify me when it's done. I will make the necessary changes to fftw and I will notify the maintainers of packages that depend on fftw3 (mostly me). The fftw and fftw3 spec files are mostly the same, but the fftw3 spec has a few details that could be helpful in creating a package whose name differs from the upstream name. -Quentin From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 30 21:32:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:32:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302132.k0ULWdQr025814@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-01-30 16:32 EST ------- * make check currently fails on FC5-devel/x86-64. The errors go away if the patch is not applied; the intmath test is causing the problem. * run rpmlint on it: the binary RPM produced has the errors below. Not sure what to do about the rpath error, as for the others, make sure all the scripts that begin with #!/bin/sh have 0755 permission. E: gnu-smalltalk binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/gst ['/home/build/redhat/tmp/smalltalk-2.2/libgst/.libs', '/usr/lib64'] E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/uar 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/examples/shell 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/mailfs 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-standard-executable-perm /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/Test.st 0744 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/examples/pepe.sed 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/uzip 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/utar 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/urar 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-standard-executable-perm /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/Load.st 0744 E: gnu-smalltalk postin-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libgst.so.4.1.1 E: gnu-smalltalk library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libgst.so.4.1.1 W: gnu-smalltalk devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/unsupported/binary.c E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/patchfs 0644E: gnu-smalltalk non-standard-executable-perm /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/Reload.st 0744 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/deb 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/ucpio 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/examples/xml.sed 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/uzoo 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/lslR 0644 E: gnu-smalltalk non-executable-script /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk/vfs/ulha 0644 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 21:39:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:39:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 173722] Review Request: stratagus - Real-time strategy gaming engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302139.k0ULdEcS027101@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 michel.salim at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-01-30 16:39 EST ------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 * rpmlint passes * Package naming OK * Package meets guidelines * Builds OK, tested on some games All clear. Sorry about the delay. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD3og0Wt0J3fd+7ZARAhYhAJ9YQSBz4pyYmqMTdTYFPbbt101ZzwCfSliH 3crL28NteE+VX/mwbHNWMLc= =7WrB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 22:48:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:48:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302248.k0UMmQc4006867@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-30 17:48 EST ------- Is there any chance that you'd want to package xpilot (www.xpilot.org), another Asteroids clone? :) It looks like it used to be in RH7. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 22:58:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:58:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302258.k0UMwQ3C008122@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From gajownik at gmail.com 2006-01-30 17:58 EST ------- Here's the review: - rpmlint errors: [y4kk0 at X i386]$ rpmlint smb4k-* W: smb4k dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/smb4k/common ../common W: smb4k-devel no-documentation [y4kk0 at X i386]$ They can be disregarded. - proper licence (GPL) - source matches upstream --- Things that should be fixed --- Change %{_datadir}/apps/konqsidebartng/ to %{_datadir}/apps/konqsidebartng/add/smb4k_add.desktop because: [y4kk0 at X tmp]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/apps/konqsidebartng/add/ kdebase-3.5.0-2 [y4kk0 at X tmp]$ This also applies to: %{_datadir}/icons/crystalsvg/* [y4kk0 at X tmp]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/icons/crystalsvg/16x16 kdelibs-3.5.0-5 [y4kk0 at X tmp]$ This should be changed to: %{_datadir}/icons/crystalsvg/*/apps/smb4k.png Package is approved but you must correct these two glitches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 23:34:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:34:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167943] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302334.k0UNY0v2012870@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167943 ------- Additional Comments From hamzy at us.ibm.com 2006-01-30 18:33 EST ------- So, how do I find a sponsor now? What is the next step in this process? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 23:46:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179276] Request for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302346.k0UNksrs014196@www.beta.redhat.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 for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179276 dennis at ausil.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-01-30 18:46 EST ------- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems clearly states thats ntfs is not allowed. the same reasons for ntfs support not being in core also effect extras. i would suggest you look at a third party repo possibly livna. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 30 23:47:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:47:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177567] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601302347.k0UNlwxP014370@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177567 ------- Additional Comments From mgarski at post.pl 2006-01-30 18:47 EST ------- Thanks for approving it. I'll fix this 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 Tue Jan 31 00:03:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179263] Review Request: perl-Text-Unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310003.k0V03Y69016057@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Unidecode - US-ASCII transliterations of Unicode text https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179263 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-01-30 19:03 EST ------- Good: Package builds and rpmlint finds nothing at all to complain about. Package meets naming and packaging guidelines. License is acceptable, matches License: tag and included in %doc (as part of README). Specfile is legible, well-written and uses macros consistently. Bad: Nothing. "BuildRequires: perl" is not necessary (see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions ) but this is not a blocker. 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 Jan 31 00:44:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167943] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310044.k0V0isVd022992@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167943 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-30 19:44 EST ------- in reply to comment #8: It looks like spot in comment #2 indicated he would do a formal review, and perhaps he is going to sponsor you as well. Next step is to wait for that, but while you are waiting you can comment on other packages that are in review to show any potential sponsors that you understand the package guidelines well. You can find such a list at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/showdependencytree.cgi?id=FE-REVIEW&hide_resolved=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 Jan 31 01:29:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:29:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178330] Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310129.k0V1TKel028263@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Azureus - a BitTorrent Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178330 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-01-30 20:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #20) > Hi Anthony ! > > Nice work you're doing... If possible, I would like to make an Azureus gcj > source package based on your ideas, and contribute it to gentoo linux. Let's take this to private mail. AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 01:47:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:47:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310147.k0V1l7KR030366@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-30 20:46 EST ------- The specfile shows that it owns everything in /usr/share/applications (%{_datadir}/applications/*), as well as all of the standard binaries (%{_bindir}/*), which is probably very bad. ;-) Also, your %files section contains: %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} %{_datadir}/%{name}/* Wouldn't simply owning the directory be simpler? %{_datadir}/%{name} My two cents. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 02:24:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:24:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179276] Request for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310224.k0V2OXKq001849@www.beta.redhat.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 for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179276 alexl at users.sourceforge.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |alexl at users.sourceforge.net ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-30 21:24 EST ------- Already in Livna: http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/4/i386/RPMS.lvn/repodata/repoview/kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.14-1.1656_FC4-0-2.1.22-0.lvn.3.4.html I guess Christopher knows about that, but was hoping that Extras might reconsider ntfs (he did acknowledgement the existence of that page). I guess a better place to open that discussion would be on fedora-extras-list, but I wouldn't hold out much hope if it's already been through once with the Red Hat legal team. The only difference about it being in livna is that people have to jump through the extra hoop of downloading the livna-release rpm to set it up. Some of the same maintainers of Extras work on Livna. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 02:26:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:26:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179276] Request for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310226.k0V2Q4td002024@www.beta.redhat.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 for kernel-module-ntfs inclusion in fedora extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179276 ------- Additional Comments From alexl at users.sourceforge.net 2006-01-30 21:25 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Already in Livna: > > http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/4/i386/RPMS.lvn/repodata/repoview/kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.14-1.1656_FC4-0-2.1.22-0.lvn.3.4.html > > I guess Christopher knows about that, I meant the forbidden items page (not the Livna page) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 02:51:33 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:51:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060131025133.873278004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 14 abcm2ps-4.12.6-2.fc3 bidiv-1.5-1.fc3 ipython-0.7.1.fix1-1.fc3 konversation-0.19-1.fc3 libnjb-2.2.5-1.fc3 openal-0.0.8-2.fc3 python-simpletal-4.1-1.fc3 python-tpg-3.0.6-1.fc3 scim-anthy-0.9.0-1.fc3 tinyerp-3.2.1-1.fc3 ushare-0.9.5-4.fc3 xfce4-diskperf-plugin-1.5-4.fc3 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin-0.81-2.fc3 xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.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 Jan 31 02:51:49 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:51:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060131025149.428DC8004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 19 abcm2ps-4.12.6-2.fc4 bidiv-1.5-1.fc4 blender-2.41-1.fc4 ipython-0.7.1.fix1-1.fc4 konversation-0.19-1.fc4 libnjb-2.2.5-1.fc4 mercurial-0.8-1.fc4 octave-forge-2006.01.28-1.fc4 openal-0.0.8-2.fc4 perl-Crypt-SmbHash-0.12-2.fc4 python-simpletal-4.1-1.fc4 python-tpg-3.0.6-1.fc4 scim-anthy-0.9.0-1.fc4 tclsoap-1.6.7-1.fc4 tinyerp-3.2.1-1.fc4 ushare-0.9.5-4.fc4 xfce4-diskperf-plugin-1.5-4.fc4 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin-0.81-2.fc4 xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.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 Tue Jan 31 02:52:11 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:52:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060131025211.563508004@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 26 NetworkManager-vpnc-0.5.0-1 abcm2ps-4.12.6-2.fc5 asa-1.2-1.fc5 blender-2.41-1.fc5 cln-1.1.11-3.fc5 denyhosts-1.1.4-3.fc5 denyhosts-1.1.4-5.fc5 dxpc-3.8.2-3.fc5 enchant-1.2.1-1.fc5 firestarter-1.0.3-8.fc5 gparted-0.2-1.fc5 gweled-0.7-3.fc5 ipython-0.7.1.fix1-1.fc5 js-1.5-2.fc5 konversation-0.19-1.fc5 lacewing-1.10-3.fc5 lagan-1.21-1.fc5 libnjb-2.2.5-1.fc5 libxfcegui4-4.2.3-3.fc5 mail-notification-2.0-10.fc5 mercurial-0.8-1.fc5 openal-0.0.8-2.fc5 python-simpletal-4.1-1.fc5 python-tpg-3.0.6-1.fc5 tinyerp-3.2.1-1.fc5 xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-1.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 Jan 31 04:03:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:03:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310403.k0V43PGK017227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-01-30 23:03 EST ------- >The specfile shows that it owns everything in /usr/share/applications >(%{_datadir}/applications/*), as well as all of the standard binaries >(%{_bindir}/*), which is probably very bad. ;-) Those globs are expanded at build time under the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, so they only match files that are installed in the %install step of the rpm building. :) In this case they expand to: /usr/share/applications/fedora-jigdo.desktop /usr/bin/jigdo /usr/bin/jigdo-file /usr/bin/jigdo-lite Which is fine. Some folks like using * in files to match a bunch of files, while others prefer to list each file out. It's just a matter of taste as long as there are no duplicate files listed or files/dirs that are owned by another package already. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 05:03:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310503.k0V538nC024575@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ------- Additional Comments From ianburrell at gmail.com 2006-01-31 00:03 EST ------- I thought just listing the directory would work. And it did work for building on FC4. But when I built the package on rawhide, it complained about the files in usr/shared/jigdo not being included. So I put in the glob. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imlinux at gmail.com Tue Jan 31 05:25:46 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Michael McGrath) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:25:46 -0600 Subject: Mock and environment variables Message-ID: <3237e4410601302125l25e5d9b4waa83a133e4686d05@mail.gmail.com> Does anyone know what environmetn variables Mock uses when building a package? Specifically I'm interested in PATH -Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 06:21:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:21:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310621.k0V6LRNx000452@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-31 01:21 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.4-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.4-1.src.rpm * Tue Jan 31 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.4-1 - Update to 1.2.4. -- 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 Tue Jan 31 06:22:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:22:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178169] Review Request: jigdo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310622.k0V6MsHV000708@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jigdo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178169 ------- Additional Comments From admin at ramshacklestudios.com 2006-01-31 01:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment 6) Ack. I had not realized that. Thanks, Kevin! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 06:23:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:23:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310623.k0V6NVpQ000842@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-31 01:23 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.3-1.2.6.15_1.1881_FC5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.3-1.2.6.15_1.1881_FC5.src.rpm * Mon Jan 30 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-1 - Update to 1.2.3. - Update to latest kernel spec template. - Remove upstreamed ztdummy_rtc patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 06:24:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:24:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310624.k0V6OoVN001038@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-31 01:24 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.3-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.3-1.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jan 31 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-1 - Preserve timestamps when we install. - Use custom init.d file that does all the fancy RH stuff. * Mon Jan 30 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.3-1 - Update to 1.2.3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 07:55:39 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:55:39 +0000 Subject: Mock and environment variables In-Reply-To: <3237e4410601302125l25e5d9b4waa83a133e4686d05@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410601302125l25e5d9b4waa83a133e4686d05@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1138694139.1962.2.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 23:25 -0600, Michael McGrath wrote: > Does anyone know what environmetn variables Mock uses when building a > package? Specifically I'm interested in PATH I'd have thought it'd be the standard "non-root user" PATH, modified by any /etc/profile.d/*.sh entries pulled in using BuildRequires. You could test it by adding a line "echo PATH is $PATH" in %prep, %build etc. of a spec file for something and look in the build.log. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 08:09:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:09:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310809.k0V89B7Z013014@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-31 03:08 EST ------- Maybe xpilot NG would be a better choice? : http://xpilot.sourceforge.net/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 08:19:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:19:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178568] Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310819.k0V8Jj5U014662@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lacewing Asteroid like game with may different ships https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178568 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 2006-01-31 03:19 EST ------- Imported & Build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 08:28:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:28:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310828.k0V8Sd7H016541@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-01-31 03:28 EST ------- Description has been fixed, new spec at: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/overgod.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 Tue Jan 31 09:49:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 04:49:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176026] Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601310949.k0V9nDvY028211@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-31 04:49 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SPECS/pikdev.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SRPMS/pikdev-0.8.4-2.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jan 31 2006 Alain Portal 0.8.4-2 - Don't use the precompiled version of pkp * Mon Jan 30 2006 Alain Portal 0.8.4-1 - New upstream version -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 10:07:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 05:07:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311007.k0VA7hxY030378@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-01-31 05:07 EST ------- Anreas, you didn't took into account my Comment #1 about the paragrph stating that the line browser is unavailable. Ian, do you want to review the package? If so, you should assign the bug report to yourself, otherwise I'll do 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 Tue Jan 31 10:53:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 05:53:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177168] Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311053.k0VArBLm004918@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177168 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |paul at city-fan.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-31 05:52 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is same as perl, matches spec - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package build OK on FC4 (i386) and in mock for rawhide (i386) - BR's OK - no locales, libraries, pkgconfigs, or subpackages to worry about - not relocatable - no directory ownership or permissions problems - 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 - scriptlets Needswork: - Source URL http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/id/N/NU/NUFFIN/UNIVERSAL-isa-%{version}.tar.gz doesn't work - suggest http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/N/NU/NUFFIN/UNIVERSAL-isa-%{version}.tar.gz instead Fix that and 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 redhat.com Tue Jan 31 11:12:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:12:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177580] Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311112.k0VBCQp5008536@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-31 06:12 EST ------- I'm quite interested in this package and am also a potential sponsor, but unfortunately I don't have a rawhide system (needed for the mono deps) to try this on. Perhaps after FC5 is released if nobody else steps up before then. I concur with the remarks on comment #1 though, particularly the first three. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 11:42:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:42:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178310] Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311142.k0VBgSrr013761@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: w3c-libwww - An HTTP library of common code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178310 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-01-31 06:42 EST ------- Sorry forgot all about testing this... :) Will do so in a sec and get back to 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 Jan 31 11:43:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:43:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311143.k0VBhK5f013877@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-01-31 06:43 EST ------- Use export CXXFLAGS="${RPM_OPT_FLAGS} -I%{_includedir}/libbinio" instead of just export CXXFLAGS=-I%{_includedir}/libbinio so you build with Fedora default compiler flags. BR libstdc++-devel is redundant, as gcc-c++ is an implicit build requirement and depends on libstdc++-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 Tue Jan 31 13:06:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:06:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175438] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311306.k0VD6acl025065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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=175438 ------- Additional Comments From jarkko at saunalahti.fi 2006-01-31 08:06 EST ------- > The problem with plugins is, that they usually add new dependencies > which are not need for the core functionality. So my first 'smart' > package had a physical '-plugins' subpackage. Because *current* > plugins do not add mentioned dependencies, I merged it back into the > main package. I bet you will never ship smart-plugins because when a plugin adds that kind of dependencies you will make a separate subpackage for that specific plugin, not for all plugins. This is the reason I'd say don't provide this smart-plugins package. > 'smart --shell' is a textual interface for user interaction. So, it > can be labeled 'TUI'... But ok, to make it clear, I renamed it to > '-tui-shell'.... I'd still follow the usage "smart --shell" and name this as "smart-shell". But, as you don't ship a separate smart-tui, smart-shell or smart-tui-shell subpackage, I'd say don't provide it. The reason is to not pollute the package namespace with packages which doesn't really exist and which have never even existed. (For the same reason I'd say don't provide smartpm-* packages.) > README should tell this also... Again: there is absolutely no technical > reason to add versioned dependencies here Is there a policy for this? There might be because this is a very general issue; whether to issue all version requirements or only those which might not be satisfied already in the distribution. > Ok, you have won. I renamed it to 'smart-gui-gtk' which should please > everybody. I'd still like to follow the usage "smart --gui" here and name the package as "smart-gui". I don't like long names... And I don't like names which don't follow the upstream names... And I don't like names which try to tell things like the used library etc... Those namings belong to Debian policy (which I think causes more confusion than help - again: rpm --requires tells the toolkit etc.). Fedora policy is to name packages like they are named in upstream. > 'rpmbuild ...' environments should have coreutils installed I think you are right there. Only those requirements should be issued which aren't already provided by other requirements (although you should be 100% sure they really are provided). And in this case /bin/touch is provided by coreutils which provides fileutils which in turn is required by rpm. :) > which macro? %{__install} (from /usr/lib/rpm/macros). In general, I'd use the most common macros - at least those from /usr/lib/rpm/macros because those should not add any extra dependencies. > 'test' is a bash builtin Yes, sorry. I really noticed "which" is not very usefull command - "type" is much better. :) > ??? Forget. I was just talking in general 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Jan 31 13:16:11 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:16:11 +0100 Subject: Request for Help: Writer(s) needed for Fedora Extras Weekly Reports Message-ID: <1138713371.2800.73.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi! For those that haven't noticed yet: Some people maintain a section "Fedora Projects Weekly Reports" in the wiki for some weeks now. See http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/WeeklyReports That's IMHO a really good idea, but currently there is no writer that maintains the part for Fedora Extras. I did it once http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/WeeklyReports/2006-Jan-16#Extras but I don't have time to do it each week. Is anybody here interested in this job? I really would appreciate it if one or two people could do this job together. A bit watching fedora-extras-list, copy-and-pasting parts from the FESCo meeting summaries and a small compiled list of all newly added packages in Fedora Extras is round about the work that needs to be done (see also above link for an example). CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 13:34:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:34:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] New: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts 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=179439 Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/linux-libertine-fonts.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/linux-libertine-fonts-2.0.1-1.src.rpm Description: The Linux Libertine Open Fonts are a TrueType font family for practical use in documents. They were created to provide a free alternative to proprietary standard fonts. Still looking for a sponsor. See also bug 176784. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:02:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:02:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311402.k0VE2wd5001570@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-31 09:02 EST ------- A couple of things: - Rename package to font-linux-libertine - Use pristine source instead of prepackaged binaries, i.e., use fontforge and a script to generate font files from LinLibertineSRC.tgz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:19:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:19:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175899] Review Request: perl-DBD-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311419.k0VEJpDl004032@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175899 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-31 09:19 EST ------- Already built for devel. Pending: FC-4 CSV branch creation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:20:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:20:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176137] Review Request: perl-Log-Log4perl - Log4j implementation for Perl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311420.k0VEKErZ004178@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Log4perl - Log4j implementation for Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176137 Bug 176137 depends on bug 175899, which changed state. Bug 175899 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-CSV - DBI driver for CSV files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175899 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 Jan 31 14:20:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:20:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179443] New: Review Request: perl-Math-GMP 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=179443 Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-GMP Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Math-GMP/perl-Math-GMP.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Math-GMP/perl-Math-GMP-2.04-1.src.rpm Description: Math::GMP was designed to be a drop-in replacement both for Math::BigInt and for regular integer arithmetic. Unlike BigInt, though, Math::GMP uses the GNU gmp library for all of its calculations, as opposed to straight Perl functions. This can result in speed improvements. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:27:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:27:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311427.k0VER6Z4005250@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rdieter at math.unl.edu ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-31 09:26 EST ------- > Use pristine source instead of prepackaged binaries, i.e., use fontforge and a > script to generate font files from LinLibertineSRC.tgz Why? I see no problem using pregenerated fonts (especially if they're created by the upstream provider) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:28:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:28:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311428.k0VESodm005630@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-01-31 09:28 EST ------- >> Use pristine source instead of prepackaged binaries, i.e., use fontforge and a >> script to generate font files from LinLibertineSRC.tgz > Why? I see no problem using pregenerated fonts... That is unless there is some un-named advantage (that I fail to see) by generating the fonts from source. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:29:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:29:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179444] New: Review Request: perl-Class-Loader 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=179444 Summary: Review Request: perl-Class-Loader Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: paul at city-fan.org QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Class-Loader/perl-Class-Loader.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Class-Loader/perl-Class-Loader-2.03-1.src.rpm Description: Certain applications like to defer the decision to use a particular module till runtime. This is possible in perl, and is a useful trick in situations where the type of data is not known at compile time and the application doesn't wish to pre-compile modules to handle all types of data it can work with. Loading modules at runtime can also provide flexible interfaces for perl modules. Modules can let the programmer decide what modules will be used by it instead of hard-coding their names. Class::Loader is an inheritable class that provides a method, _load(), to load a module from disk and construct an object by calling its constructor. It also provides a way to map modules' names and associated metadata with symbolic names that can be used in place of module names at _load(). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:30:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:30:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177168] Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311430.k0VEUQvu006088@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177168 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-31 09:30 EST ------- Paul, My mistake! There were two "id" directories in the supplied source URL. New SRPM: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-UNIVERSAL-isa-0.05-2.src.rpm The specfile link is the same. jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 14:37:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:37:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177168] Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311437.k0VEbLuc007376@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177168 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-01-31 09:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > New SRPM: > http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-UNIVERSAL-isa-0.05-2.src.rpm 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 Jan 31 14:54:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:54:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311454.k0VEsxJq010323@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-31 09:54 EST ------- New version: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki-1.5.6-1.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jan 31 2006 Roozbeh Pournader - 1.5.6-1 - Update to upstream 1.5.6 -- 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 Tue Jan 31 15:03:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:03:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311503.k0VF3Gf2011950@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-01-31 10:03 EST ------- The advantage would be that we won't have to provide both the source and the pregenerated binaries in the SRPM since the font is GPL. Plus we can have fontforge generate a sample sheet for the font in PDF format, which might be nice to have. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 15:05:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:05:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177168] Review Request: perl-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311505.k0VF5850012390@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-UNIVERSAL-isa - Hack around module authors using UNIVERSAL::isa as a function https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177168 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-31 10:05 EST ------- Paul, Thanks. Package built for devel. Pending: FC-4 branch creation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imlinux at gmail.com Tue Jan 31 15:10:14 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:10:14 -0600 Subject: Mock and environment variables In-Reply-To: <1138694139.1962.2.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <3237e4410601302125l25e5d9b4waa83a133e4686d05@mail.gmail.com> <1138694139.1962.2.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <43DF7DD6.9000402@gmail.com> Paul Howarth wrote: >On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 23:25 -0600, Michael McGrath wrote: > > >>Does anyone know what environmetn variables Mock uses when building a >>package? Specifically I'm interested in PATH >> >> > >I'd have thought it'd be the standard "non-root user" PATH, modified by >any /etc/profile.d/*.sh entries pulled in using BuildRequires. You could >test it by adding a line "echo PATH is $PATH" in %prep, %build etc. of a >spec file for something and look in the build.log. > >Paul. > > > Interesting mock : export PATH="/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin" normal user: PATH="/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/mmcgrath/bin" Not what I'd expected either, it was causing one of my packages to compile with Mock but not with my normal user :-D -Mike From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Jan 31 15:15:37 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:45:37 +0330 Subject: Asking for reviews Message-ID: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> This is to announce that I will mow your garden, babysit your child, review your package, or kiss your ass (if you prefer) if you give me packages reviews! Packages of mine that I would love to see reviewed, in order of preference: Translate Toolkit: A collection of tools to assist software localization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177204 MediaWiki: The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 TTX/fonttools: a python-based tool to convert TrueType fonts to XML and back https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 python-enchant: Python bindings for Enchant spell-checking library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177315 spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 ... well, I simply hate to maintain things in bugzilla instead of in CVS! The humble package-submitter who even tried reviewing a few packages, but didn't hear from their submitters, Roozbeh From paul at city-fan.org Tue Jan 31 15:16:13 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:16:13 +0000 Subject: Mock and environment variables In-Reply-To: <43DF7DD6.9000402@gmail.com> References: <3237e4410601302125l25e5d9b4waa83a133e4686d05@mail.gmail.com> <1138694139.1962.2.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <43DF7DD6.9000402@gmail.com> Message-ID: <43DF7F3D.7050103@city-fan.org> Mike McGrath wrote: > Paul Howarth wrote: > > >>On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 23:25 -0600, Michael McGrath wrote: >> >> >> >>>Does anyone know what environmetn variables Mock uses when building a >>>package? Specifically I'm interested in PATH >>> >>> >> >>I'd have thought it'd be the standard "non-root user" PATH, modified by >>any /etc/profile.d/*.sh entries pulled in using BuildRequires. You could >>test it by adding a line "echo PATH is $PATH" in %prep, %build etc. of a >>spec file for something and look in the build.log. >> >>Paul. >> >> >> > > Interesting mock : > > export > PATH="/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin" > > normal user: > > PATH="/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/mmcgrath/bin" > > Not what I'd expected either, it was causing one of my packages to > compile with Mock but not with my normal user :-D Hmm, mock appears to have picked up root's PATH (the sbin entries) rather than a regular user environment, which is what I'd have expected given that the "mockbuild" user is a regular account. Paul. From dragoran at feuerpokemon.de Tue Jan 31 15:47:40 2006 From: dragoran at feuerpokemon.de (dragoran) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:47:40 +0100 Subject: extras package that require changes in selinux-policy (initng) In-Reply-To: <43DE6A09.2040602@redhat.com> References: <43DE4707.9010900@feuerpokemon.de> <43DE6A09.2040602@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43DF869C.1090700@feuerpokemon.de> Daniel J Walsh wrote: > dragoran wrote: > >> Hello. >> I am working on selinux support in initng, which is in review for >> extras now [1]. >> But it seems that initng requires a policy to work (just tested in >> targeted mode) >> Using the default context (sbin_t) lets all apps that are started >> from initng run as kernel_t. > > What is the path? We can set it up in policy. >> Relabling /sbin/initng to init_exec_t (same as init) fixes this and >> the processes run as init_t and udev_t for udev, but some issues >> still remain. > > I will add to policy. ok thx >> hald,httpd, etc. also run as init_t which is *wrong* they have to get >> into their own domain. How is this handled in sysvinit? >> After reading the code I havn't found anything about it. > > Are the startup scripts marked initrc_exec_t? > > yes I did chcon -t initrc_exec_t on all files in /etc/initng/system and /etc/initng/daemons >> The patch I wrote can be found here: >> http://bugzilla.initng.thinktux.net/show_bug.cgi?id=365 >> Did I do something wrong? Did I miss something? >> After fixing this we will run into an other problem. Every time the >> filesystem gots relabled initng will become sbin_t which will break it. >> To fix this we need to modify the selinux-policy. What should be done >> if a package in extras requires to change a core package? >> Should I just fill a bug against it and hope that it will be released >> as an update for FC4, and gets into rawhide too? >> Was unable to find anything about it in the wiki. >> 1: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 >> >> -- >> fedora-selinux-list mailing list >> fedora-selinux-list at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list > > > From rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Jan 31 16:05:42 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:05:42 -0600 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > This is to announce that I will mow your garden, babysit your child, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > review your package, or kiss your ass (if you prefer) if you give me > packages reviews! Sign me up! You sure? You haven't met my kids yet. (-: Either way, I'll see if I can help out. -- Rex From bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Jan 31 16:23:15 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:23:15 -0500 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1138724595.3967.1.camel@shuttle.273piedmont.org> On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 18:45 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > python-enchant: Python bindings for Enchant spell-checking library > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177315 I'll review the python-enchant package for you. I go ahead and accept the bug here in a little bit. /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 bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 16:22:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:22:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311622.k0VGM4Qf026601@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-01-31 11:21 EST ------- All NEEDSWORK items addressed. ACCEPTED (I wasn't aware of xpilot-ng. It looks like a better choice) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From wart at kobold.org Tue Jan 31 16:32:36 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:32:36 -0800 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <43DF9124.7090201@kobold.org> Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > This is to announce that I will mow your garden, babysit your child, > review your package, or kiss your ass (if you prefer) if you give me > packages reviews! > > Packages of mine that I would love to see reviewed, in order of > preference: > > Translate Toolkit: A collection of tools to assist software localization > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177204 I'll pick up Translate Toolkit. You'll have to give me a few hours to reset my test environment. --Mike From ed at eh3.com Tue Jan 31 16:35:32 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:35:32 -0500 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1138725332.15027.44.camel@ernie> On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 18:45 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > This is to announce that I will mow your garden, babysit your child, > review your package, or kiss your ass (if you prefer) if you give me > packages reviews! Hi Roozbeh, Many packages have been in-submission for months. I'm trying to do more reviews (aiming for 1+ a week) but free time is scarce. Between work, family, etc. I think many folks are doing what they can. > MediaWiki: The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 If someone else hasn't already done it I'll review MediaWiki this weekend or the next. I promise. :-) > The humble package-submitter who even tried reviewing a few packages, > but didn't hear from their submitters, Yes! Doing reviews is the *best* way to improve things! I know this sounds really obvious, but if you submit N packages and do less than N reviews, then you're a net contribution to the backlog. 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 Tue Jan 31 16:34:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:34:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311634.k0VGYfAs029263@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-01-31 11:34 EST ------- -%files math needs a %defattr -%description change - "it has an wide" to "it has a wide" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From imlinux at gmail.com Tue Jan 31 16:39:08 2006 From: imlinux at gmail.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:39:08 -0600 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138725332.15027.44.camel@ernie> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1138725332.15027.44.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <43DF92AC.9040708@gmail.com> >If someone else hasn't already done it I'll review MediaWiki this >weekend or the next. I promise. :-) > > > > >>The humble package-submitter who even tried reviewing a few packages, >>but didn't hear from their submitters, >> >> > >Yes! Doing reviews is the *best* way to improve things! I know this >sounds really obvious, but if you submit N packages and do less than N >reviews, then you're a net contribution to the backlog. > >Ed > > > Sorry Ed ;-) already snagged it. -Mike From tibbs at math.uh.edu Tue Jan 31 16:42:00 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:42:00 -0600 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138725332.15027.44.camel@ernie> (Ed Hill's message of "Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:35:32 -0500") References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> <1138725332.15027.44.camel@ernie> Message-ID: >>>>> "EH" == Ed Hill writes: EH> If someone else hasn't already done it I'll review MediaWiki this EH> weekend or the next. I promise. :-) I was going to claim it but someone beat me to it. I had checked the bug a few days ago and given all of the comments I thought someone already was reviewing it. - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 16:40:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:40:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311640.k0VGe9xo030376@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 ------- Additional Comments From mccann0011 at hotmail.com 2006-01-31 11:40 EST ------- Thanks Ed, good catch. Not sure what happened, but I've updated the source tarball with a fresh copy and rebuilt. SRPM and SPEC now available online (version 3). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 16:58:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:58:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 176434] Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311658.k0VGwjGQ001596@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176434 ------- Additional Comments From paul at xtdnet.nl 2006-01-31 11:58 EST ------- Release versions are always integers, not "1.4". You have might done this for the review, but please don't do it for releases. So please create a "2" release. Other then that, no issues. rpmlint gives one warning: W: spicctrl dangerous-command-in-%post rm Which i guess is fine, assuming that the device would not be in use. I'm 500km from my vaio right now, but I will be able to check the functionality next week. FE-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 Jan 31 17:02:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:02:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177658] Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601311702.k0VH2Nsw002421@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mediawiki - The PHP-based wiki software behind Wikipedia https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177658 ------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info 2006-01-31 12:02 EST ------- New version: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/mediawiki-1.5.6-2.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jan 31 2006 Roozbeh Pournader - 1.5.6-2 - Add %%defattr for -math subpackage - Fixed typo in description -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From jamatos at fc.up.pt Tue Jan 31 19:18:21 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:18:21 +0000 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <43DE7E4F.2060406@ieee.org> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601191836.43586.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43DE7E4F.2060406@ieee.org> Message-ID: <200601311918.21837.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Monday 30 January 2006 20:59, Quentin Spencer wrote: > OK, sorry about the delay in responding. The new 3.1 release of fftw is > out now, and I have checked the necessary changes for the fftw3 package > into CVS, but I'm going to wait on requesting a build until we reach a > final decision on this change. So, here's my proposal: we change both > FC-4 and FC-5 branches, you take over the 2.x branch under whatever name > you want (I assume you'll call it fftw2, but it also occured to me that > we could call it compat-fftw2 or something like that--you're the > maintainer so you can decide). I will choose fftw2 since in a sense it is a different library. Also usually we don't have devel packages for compat packages, this is a requirement now, so.. > I will take over fftw and update it to > the new 3.1 release, and the fftw3 name will be abandoned. If you agree > with this, go ahead and create the 2.x package and notify me when it's > done. I will make the necessary changes to fftw and I will notify the > maintainers of packages that depend on fftw3 (mostly me). The fftw and > fftw3 spec files are mostly the same, but the fftw3 spec has a few > details that could be helpful in creating a package whose name differs > from the upstream name. The other option is for you to take control of fftw version 2, I will not object. :-) Notice that I am not refusing the maintenance of fftw. :-) So whatever is the path taken we should proceed. :-) If you decline the maintenance of version 2 as soon as you answer I will change the ownership of fftw, now rename fftw2, to me. I will import the last srpm to extras and I will require the creation of branch FC4 and the removal of fftw3 from development and FC4. Does this sounds like a plan? :-) > -Quentin -- Jos? Ab?lio From qspencer at ieee.org Tue Jan 31 19:35:10 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:35:10 -0600 Subject: Bunch of newly orphaned packages up for grabs In-Reply-To: <200601311918.21837.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1137482111.28950.99.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <200601191836.43586.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <43DE7E4F.2060406@ieee.org> <200601311918.21837.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <43DFBBEE.2020408@ieee.org> Jose' Matos wrote: >On Monday 30 January 2006 20:59, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > >>OK, sorry about the delay in responding. The new 3.1 release of fftw is >>out now, and I have checked the necessary changes for the fftw3 package >>into CVS, but I'm going to wait on requesting a build until we reach a >>final decision on this change. So, here's my proposal: we change both >>FC-4 and FC-5 branches, you take over the 2.x branch under whatever name >>you want (I assume you'll call it fftw2, but it also occured to me that >>we could call it compat-fftw2 or something like that--you're the >>maintainer so you can decide). >> >> > > I will choose fftw2 since in a sense it is a different library. Also usually >we don't have devel packages for compat packages, this is a requirement now, >so.. > > > >>I will take over fftw and update it to >>the new 3.1 release, and the fftw3 name will be abandoned. If you agree >>with this, go ahead and create the 2.x package and notify me when it's >>done. I will make the necessary changes to fftw and I will notify the >>maintainers of packages that depend on fftw3 (mostly me). The fftw and >>fftw3 spec files are mostly the same, but the fftw3 spec has a few >>details that could be helpful in creating a package whose name differs >>from the upstream name. >> >> > > The other option is for you to take control of fftw version 2, I will not >object. :-) > > You can have it. I don't maintain anything that uses fftw 2.x, so I have no interest in maintaining it. > Notice that I am not refusing the maintenance of fftw. :-) > > So whatever is the path taken we should proceed. :-) > > If you decline the maintenance of version 2 as soon as you answer I will >change the ownership of fftw, now rename fftw2, to me. > > I will import the last srpm to extras and I will require the creation of >branch FC4 and the removal of fftw3 from development and FC4. > > Does this sounds like a plan? :-) > > This sounds like a plan. -Quentin From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Tue Jan 31 19:41:35 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:41:35 +0100 Subject: Asking for reviews In-Reply-To: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> References: <1138720537.3191.16.camel@tameshk.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1138736495.2894.8.camel@bureau.maison> Le mardi 31 janvier 2006 ? 18:45 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader a ?crit : > This is to announce that I will mow your garden, babysit your child, > review your package, or kiss your ass (if you prefer) if you give me > packages reviews! > > Packages of mine that I would love to see reviewed, in order of > preference: > .... > > TTX/fonttools: a python-based tool to convert TrueType fonts to XML and > back > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 > I just tried to review one package without news from the submitter but i will try to review fonttools. I have also a package to review (it blocks qucs update) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 if someone would like to review i will be able to update qucs soon. Eric From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 31 20:04:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:04:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179444] Review Request: perl-Class-Loader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312004.k0VK4fGt011626@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-Class-Loader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179444 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpo at di.uminho.pt OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-01-31 15:04 EST ------- APPROVED MD5SUMS: 947a8fff66edf7d1e0a03eee5f583d52 perl-Class-Loader-2.03-1.src.rpm 2e2ace3429380e2dad2f0e82137511b8 Class-Loader-2.03.tar.gz 51d344c0f704a92c00ef64ed5c2d25a9 perl-Class-Loader.spec Sources: * Class-Loader-2.03.tar.gz: MD5 digest checked against CPAN tarball Good: * URL and Source url are valid * License verified (main POD page and Makefile.PL) * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * File permissions are ok * Builds without problems in FC3, and FC5t2 * (Un)installs without problems in FC3, and FC5t2A * Crypt::Random test suite completed successfully (with Class::Loader and Math::Pari) Random notes: * This module uses the CPAN module * Kwalitee report: http://cpants.dev.zsi.at/dist/Class-Loader -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 20:06:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:06:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 167943] Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312006.k0VK6uOT012380@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sblim-cmpi-base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167943 jvdias at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jvdias at redhat.com 2006-01-31 15:06 EST ------- OK, I've now completed review, and sponsored Mark Hamzy to submit the packages . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 20:14:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:14:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179439] Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312014.k0VKEOco013781@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: linux-libertine-fonts - TrueType serif fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439 ------- Additional Comments From frank at scirocco-5v-turbo.de 2006-01-31 15:14 EST ------- It's crystal clear that we have to provide the sources. Somehow I missed the fact on a font package. Sorry. Apparently I'm not the only one... ;) New try: Spec: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/font-linux-libertine.spec SRPM: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/font-linux-libertine-2.0.1-2.src.rpm Used fontforge script: http://www.scirocco-5v-turbo.de/fedora/generate-fonts.pe -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 21:09:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:09:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312109.k0VL92bZ027941@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 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 2006-01-31 16:08 EST ------- This sounds like an interesting package, I might be willing to help / do a review. Can you for starters post a version which works on current FC-5 / has the sort errors 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 Tue Jan 31 21:21:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:21:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165314] Review Request: kismet -- A WLAN detector, sniffer and IDS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312121.k0VLLxCB030442@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 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 2006-01-31 16:21 EST ------- I might be willing todo a review, one gotcha I'll have to believe you on your blue eyes that this works as I don't have a wireless LAN (or card). Here's a couple of mustfixes for starters: -make sure all the fedora-usermgmt Wiki pages are uptodate, also include a link to: http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2005-July/msg00000.html on atleast one of them and a link to to this bug under the kismet entry in the table. -put a link to them on one of the main pages (scriptlets perhaps?) so that it can be found by navigating / google can find it, instead of only being able to get there by knowing the URL. -use %{xxx} everywhere, I know this isn't in the guidelines but _everyone_ does it (well appearantly not everyone). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 21:25:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312125.k0VLP7oE030922@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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 2006-01-31 16:24 EST ------- Thanks for your help both of you. I'll fix the sort problem so you can give it a try. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 21:27:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:27:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177096] Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312127.k0VLRnTO031346@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fonttools: A tool to convert True/OpenType fonts to XML and back https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177096 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-01-31 16:27 EST ------- Review for release 0.2.20060103cvs: * RPM name is OK * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of fonttools looks OK * File list of fonttools looks OK Needs work: * Encoding should be UTF-8 * No downloadable source. Please give the full URL in the Source tag. I know the source from cvs are not downloadable but it is a MUST item. Maybe you can ask maintainer to make a snapshot ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 21:31:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:31:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 178625] Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312131.k0VLVIvA032015@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: overgod - Another Asteroid like game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178625 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 2006-01-31 16:31 EST ------- Imported & Build -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 22:00:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:00:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177315] Review Request: python-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312200.k0VM0ZCQ004905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177315 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-31 17:00 EST ------- MD5Sums: 31bb75201ec0252793e2b5b57df683c0 pyenchant-1.1.3.tar.gz Good: * Source URL is canonical * Upstream source tarball verified * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines * Group Tag is from the official list * Buildroot has all required elements * All paths begin with macros * All directories are owned by this or other packages * All necessary BuildRequires listed * Package rebuilds as non-root user * Package installs and uninstalls cleanly on FC5t2 * rpmlint is clean Minor: * Requires enchant can be dropped since the soname should pull it in PUBLISH +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 Jan 31 22:04:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:04:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177315] Review Request: python-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200601312204.k0VM4vE1005972@www.beta.redhat.com> Please 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-enchant - Python bindings for Enchant spellchecking library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177315 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-01-31 17:04 EST ------- Oh, forgot to mention in my review that a newer version (1.1.5) is available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?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 Jan 31 22:21:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:21:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 179510] New: Review Request: Nautilus-Flac-Converter 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=179510 Summary: Review Request: Nautilus-Flac-Converter Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: gdk at redhat.com ReportedBy: bdpepple at ameritech.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/nautilus/nautilus-flac-converter.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/nautilus/nautilus-flac-converter-0.0.2-1.src.rpm Description: Nautilus extension to convert FLACS to Ogg Vorbis. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.