[Bug 188176] Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188176
tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-05-06 15:11 EST -------
OK, now we're getting somewhere. Rawhide still looks broken to me, but builds
in FC5, i386 and x86_64 succeed and I ran through the examples on x86_64 with no
problems. rpmlint has a couple of complaints:
W: gauche-gtk hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gauche/0.8.7/lib/.packages
W: gauche-gtk hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gauche/0.8.7/lib/.packages
W: gauche-gtk doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/gauche-gtk-0.4.1/examples/glgd/run /bin/sh
The problem with the first warning is that it will set off various rootkit
detection programs and is generally a bad idea, but I'm not sure if it would be
feasible to change where gauche looks for its packages. I'm inclined to say
this isn't a blocker, but if it's not difficult to make gauche look in
"packages" instead of ".packages" then I think it would be best if you could do so.
The second is simply that the doc file is executable, which is generally
considered a bad idea although in this case the dependency doesn't cause
problems. I would suggest that you just chmod -x examples/glgd/run.
Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible; text is included in the package.
* source files match upstream:
18356efab446b9524be8371a3b852a6a Gauche-gtk-0.4.1.tgz
18356efab446b9524be8371a3b852a6a Gauche-gtk-0.4.1.tgz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (FC5, i386 and x86_64).
O rpmlint has excusable errors.
* final provides and requires are sane.
O shared libraries are present, but they are internal to Gauche and so ldconfig
doesn't need to be called.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
O file permissions are appropriate, exceot for an executable docfile.
* %clean is present.
O %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
APPROVED, but please consider the two issues above before checking in.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 180571] Review Request: puppet
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: puppet
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180571
------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald(a)gmail.com 2006-05-06 13:48 EST -------
Not running on FC5, x86_64, ruby-1.8.4-3.2
$ puppet
/usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/server/filebucket.rb:8:in `require': no such
file to load -- facter (LoadError)
from /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/server/filebucket.rb:8
from /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/server.rb:180
from /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/puppet.rb:332
from /usr/bin/puppet:58
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 188482] Review Request: scipy-0.4.8
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: scipy-0.4.8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188482
------- Additional Comments From ed(a)eh3.com 2006-05-06 13:15 EST -------
Hi Neal, heres a few more comments (not a thorough review):
good:
+ license is OK: its BSD-w/o-advertise-clause
+ source matches upstream
needswork:
- missing license file (please add "%doc LICENSE.txt")
- missing "BuildRequires: numpy"
- please use "%setup -q"
Also, *please* build your package locally in mock. The commands are:
1) yum install mock
2) add yourself to the mock group (vi /etc/group)
3) log out/in for group addition to take full effect
4) run "mock -r fedora-5-i386-core scipy-0.4.8-2.src.rpm"
and it will help you identify problems. Its a very good idea since
mock is what the buildsystem itself uses.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 177081] Review Request: nucleo
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please 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
chris.stone(a)gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|tkmame(a)retrogames.com |chris.stone(a)gmail.com
------- Additional Comments From chris.stone(a)gmail.com 2006-05-06 12:23 EST -------
Okay, it may take me a while to get to this since I have a lot of packages I
need to get in before I need this one. Also changing my e-mail address for 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.
18 years
[Bug 185795] Review Request: python-fpconst (Python lib for IEEE 754)
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please 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-fpconst (Python lib for IEEE 754)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185795
bugzilla(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package-
|list(a)redhat.com |review(a)redhat.com
tkmame(a)retrogames.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Review Request: fpconst |Review Request: python-
|(Python lib for IEEE 754) |fpconst (Python lib for IEEE
| |754)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369
ville.skytta(a)iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BugsThisDependsOn| |190911
------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2006-05-06 07:30 EST -------
Bug 190911 contains a first cut of the ctapi-common package, feel free to review
and/or take ownership.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369
------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner(a)gmx.net 2006-05-06 06:56 EST -------
an unified ctapi.h is an second problem, because some manufacture add specal
function the the api. But we can do make can ctapi-common-devel package, witch
contains an general ctapi.h witch only has the the 3 needed
funtion's(ct_init,ct_data,ct_close) so it can be used with all readers.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years
[Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369
------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner(a)gmx.net 2006-05-06 06:52 EST -------
I think number 4 is the best solution. But where build the "ctapi-common"
package?? It must be an solution where non OpenSource software also work, for
example somethink like moneyplex. Ok when an final work about the solutions was
find I will countinus to work on my package.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
18 years