[Bug 1803479] New: Review Request: libredwg-0.10.1 - new package
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803479
Bug ID: 1803479
Summary: Review Request: libredwg-0.10.1 - new package
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Reporter: reini.urban(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL:
https://github.com/LibreDWG/libredwg/releases/download/0.10.1/libredwg.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/LibreDWG/libredwg/releases/download/0.10.1/libredwg-0....
Description: GNU C library and programs to read and write DWG files
Fedora Account System Username: rurban
1st fedora package submission, but I did hundreds for cygwin, and plenty for
cpanel. A missing requirement is libps, so this is disabled for now.
This package is needed by freecad (currently optional), and later grass.
It was considered a GNU high priority project.
I'm upstream. Included are perl and python bindings. big-endian does not work,
so I disabled it. No idea about s390, mingw and arm are fine.
rpmlint:
libredwg.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dxf -> def
libredwg.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon
libredwg.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwggrep -> grepped
libredwg.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer
libredwg.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dxf -> def
libredwg.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son,
soon
libredwg.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer
libredwg.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libredwg.so.0.0.10
exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
libredwg.x86_64: E: postin-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libredwg.so.0.0.10
libredwg-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
perl-LibreDWG.x86_64: W: no-documentation
perl-LibreDWG.x86_64: E: dir-or-file-in-usr-local
/usr/local/lib64/perl5/5.30/LibreDWG.pm
perl-LibreDWG.x86_64: E: dir-or-file-in-usr-local
/usr/local/lib64/perl5/5.30/auto/LibreDWG/LibreDWG.so
python3-LibreDWG.x86_64: W: no-documentation
9 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 11 warnings.
/usr/local (i.e. perl sitearch) is needed for 0.10 and will go away with perl
installvendor support in 0.11.
postin-without-ldconfig looks like bogus to me, ldconfig should not be needed
anymore, and I included %ldconfig_scriptlets.
The exit call in the lib is on out of memory with malicious input. apps can
trap it, but it is not recommended.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
1 year, 1 month
[Bug 1713604] New: Review Request: onvifviewer - Network camera
viewer
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1713604
Bug ID: 1713604
Summary: Review Request: onvifviewer - Network camera viewer
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Reporter: casper(a)meijn.net
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/caspermeijn/ONVIFViewer/f...
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/caspermeijn/ONVIFViewer/f...
Description: The goal of this project is to replace the proprietary app that
was needed to
configure and view my IP camera. The ONVIF protocol can be used to view and
configure many types of camera's and is a open standard that can be implemented
using standard SOAP libraries. Using Qt5 for the back-end and Kirigami UI
framework makes this application a cross-platform solution.
Fedora Account System Username: caspermeijn
There are two things that I am not sure of:
* The source files related to the ONVIF protocol may be distributed, but not
modified. Is this allowed in the source package? Does this need to be stated in
the spec file? Does this change the license of the binary (and with that the
License field)?
* The tests in the package require a X server. Is this possible during a
rpmbuild? Is it useful to run these tests?
Thanks in advance.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
1 year, 4 months