mingw August 2012

mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
109 discussions

[Bug 756776] Review Request: mingw-libosinfo - MinGW Windows libvirt virtualization library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756776 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> --- $ rpmlint mingw-libosinfo.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw-libosinfo-0.1.2-2.fc17.src.rpm mingw-libosinfo.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw-libosinfo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw-libosinfo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisor -> hyper visor, hyper-visor, supervisory 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-libosinfo-0.1.2-2.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw64-libosinfo-0.1.2-2.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-detect.1 mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-query.1 mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-db-validate.1 mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw32-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisor -> hyper visor, hyper-visor, supervisory mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-query.1 mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-db-validate.1 mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: manpage-not-compressed gz /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/share/man/man1/osinfo-detect.1 mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US virtualization -> visualization, actualization, vitalization mingw64-libosinfo.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hypervisor -> hyper visor, hyper-visor, supervisory 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings. $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-libosinfo mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(libgio-2.0-0.dll) mingw32(libglib-2.0-0.dll) mingw32(libgobject-2.0-0.dll) mingw32(libosinfo-1.0-0.dll) mingw32(libxml2-2.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 pkgconfig rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-libosinfo mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(libgio-2.0-0.dll) mingw64(libglib-2.0-0.dll) mingw64(libgobject-2.0-0.dll) mingw64(libosinfo-1.0-0.dll) mingw64(libxml2-2.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 83 pkgconfig rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-libosinfo mingw32(libosinfo-1.0-0.dll) mingw32-libosinfo = 0.1.2-2.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-libosinfo mingw64(libosinfo-1.0-0.dll) mingw64-libosinfo = 0.1.2-2.fc17 $ wget --quiet https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/libosinfo/libosinfo-0.1.2.tar.gz -O - | md5sum f4bd25987a1576e7408d3635da6fb342 - $ md5sum libosinfo-0.1.2.tar.gz f4bd25987a1576e7408d3635da6fb342 libosinfo-0.1.2.tar.gz + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable [+] Compliant with generic Fedora Packaging Guidelines [+] Source package name is prefixed with 'mingw-' [+] Spec file starts with %{?mingw_package_header} [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] Spec file contains %package sections for both mingw32 and mingw64 packages [+] Binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are noarch [+] Spec file contains %{?mingw_debug_package} after the %description section [+] Uses one of the macros %mingw_configure, %mingw_cmake, or %mingw_cmake_kde4 to configure the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to build the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to install the package [/] If package contains translations, the %mingw_find_lang macro must be used [+] No binary package named mingw-$pkgname is generated [!] Libtool .la files are not bundled [+] .def files are not bundled [!] Man pages which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Info files which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Provides of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal [+] Requires of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal Your package currently also bundles libtool .la files. These aren't needed any more these days and can be removed. The man pages are also bundled with the native Fedora libosinfo package. Because of this they don't need to be bundled with the mingw package. The remaining rpmlint warnings can be ignored Please remove the .la files and man pages before importing this package in Fedora ===================================================== The package mingw-libosinfo is APPROVED by epienbro ===================================================== -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 830387] Review Request: mingw-xz - MinGW package for xz compression utilities
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> --- $ rpmlint mingw-xz.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw-xz-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-xz-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw32-xz-libs-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw32-xz-libs-static-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw64-xz-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw64-xz-libs-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw64-xz-libs-static-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.noarch.rpm mingw32-xz-libs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> tills mingw32-xz-libs.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw32-xz-libs-static.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-xz-libs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> tills mingw64-xz-libs.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-xz-libs-static.noarch: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-xz mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(liblzma-5.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 mingw32-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-xz-libs mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-xz-libs-static mingw32-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-xz mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(liblzma-5.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 83 mingw64-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-xz-libs mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 83 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-xz-libs-static mingw64-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-xz mingw32-xz = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-xz-libs mingw32(liblzma-5.dll) mingw32-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-xz-libs-static mingw32-xz-libs-static = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-xz mingw64-xz = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-xz-libs mingw64(liblzma-5.dll) mingw64-xz-libs = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-xz-libs-static mingw64-xz-libs-static = 5.1.2-2alpha.fc17 $ wget --quiet http://tukaani.org/xz/xz-5.1.2alpha.tar.gz -O - | md5sum 9bad1e249537ce69b206815cf28ca87b - $ md5sum xz-5.1.2alpha.tar.gz 9bad1e249537ce69b206815cf28ca87b xz-5.1.2alpha.tar.gz + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable [+] Compliant with generic Fedora Packaging Guidelines [+] Source package name is prefixed with 'mingw-' [+] Spec file starts with %{?mingw_package_header} [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] Spec file contains %package sections for both mingw32 and mingw64 packages [+] Binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are noarch [+] Spec file contains %{?mingw_debug_package} after the %description section [+] Uses one of the macros %mingw_configure, %mingw_cmake, or %mingw_cmake_kde4 to configure the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to build the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to install the package [/] If package contains translations, the %mingw_find_lang macro must be used [+] No binary package named mingw-$pkgname is generated [+] Libtool .la files are not bundled [+] .def files are not bundled [+] Man pages which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Info files which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Provides of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal [+] Requires of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal The remaining rpmlint warnings can be ignored ============================================== The package mingw-xz is APPROVED by epienbro ============================================== -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 830387] Review Request: mingw-xz - MinGW package for xz compression utilities
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 --- Comment #6 from Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> --- Good point. I should have looked at the build log. New spec: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-xz.spec New SRPM: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-xz-5.1.2-2alpha.fc17.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4423775 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 833622] Review Request: mingw-gmp - Cross-compiled GNU arbitrary precision library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833622 --- Comment #10 from Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> --- (In reply to comment #9) > Please set the alias to the package name, as is customary for mingw > packages, then I'd have found your review request... This is news to me and I've been involved with MinGW on Fedora since it started. This alias will cause any future bug searches with quick search to find this bug instead of all bug reports. Using the alias this way is wrong. As soon as this review is over I will remove it. > $ rpmlint mingw-gmp.spec > mingw-gmp.spec:86: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: > line 86) Fixed. > > BR mingw32/64-gcc-c++ is missing > > What exactly are source2 and source3 used for? Some apps seem to assume that they are building against the gmp source tree and require the source versions of the gmp.h and gmp-mparam.h files. I wasn't installing those files so I have fixed that. > Your spec file seems to be derived from the native spec file - it would be > nice to acknowledge this eg. in the changelog. Most or all MinGW packages will base on the native spec file due to the simple fact that you are packaging the same software for a different environment. I don't see a need to add this line to every MinGW package. > > Can you elaborate on why you're unconfortable shipping -static subpackages? > It doesn't seem hard to do (see my spec file > http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw-gmp.spec) and apparently some users > request it... I have no use for static libraries and almost all commercial Windows software ships DLLs instead of statically compiling. If the guy was reviewing my package I might consider adding a static package, but he was just kicking up dust. I don't have time for that. If you'd like to review my package I'd consider it. I realize there is a newer version of gmp available but for rawhide only. I'll ship 5.0.2 for F17 and the new version for F18+. New spec: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-gmp.spec New SRPM: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-gmp-5.0.2-2.fc17.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4423762 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 830387] Review Request: mingw-xz - MinGW package for xz compression utilities
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 --- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > > In the %build phase you're adding -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to the CFLAGS. Is > > this really needed for MinGW builds? IIRC this is a Linux-specific hack. > > Yes, because in the MinGW headers there are specific checks for > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS to enable 64-bit sized variables for file handling. This > enables large file (>4GB) support. If I am mistaken about this I can remove > them, but it looks like they are needed to me. Okay, good enough for me In that case, could replace $MINGW32_CFLAGS and $MINGW64_CFLAGS with %{mingw32_cflags} and %{mingw64_cflags} so that the regular MinGW CFLAGS get applied properly? By default the environment flags MINGW32_CFLAGS and MINGW64_CFLAGS aren't set automatically -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 830387] Review Request: mingw-xz - MinGW package for xz compression utilities
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 --- Comment #4 from Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> --- (In reply to comment #2) > In the %build phase you're adding -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to the CFLAGS. Is > this really needed for MinGW builds? IIRC this is a Linux-specific hack. Yes, because in the MinGW headers there are specific checks for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS to enable 64-bit sized variables for file handling. This enables large file (>4GB) support. If I am mistaken about this I can remove them, but it looks like they are needed to me. > rpmlint also gives some minor complaints about mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs. > Could you fix that one as well? Not sure how that happened. Fixed and updated to 5.1.2. New spec: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-xz.spec New SRPM: http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-xz-5.1.2-1alpha.fc17.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4423754 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 851848] Review Request: mingw-harfbuzz - MinGW Windows Harfbuzz library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851848 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> --- Thank you very much for the quick review! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: mingw-harfbuzz Short Description: MinGW Windows Harfbuzz library Owners: epienbro kalev Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 851848] Review Request: mingw-harfbuzz - MinGW Windows Harfbuzz library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851848 Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> --- $ rpmlint mingw-harfbuzz.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint ~/Downloads/mingw-harfbuzz-0.9.3-1.fc19.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -qp --requires ~/Downloads/mingw32-harfbuzz-0.9.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw32(gdi32.dll) mingw32(icuuc48.dll) mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(libcairo-2.dll) mingw32(libfreetype-6.dll) mingw32(libgcc_s_sjlj-1.dll) mingw32(libglib-2.0-0.dll) mingw32(libgobject-2.0-0.dll) mingw32(libharfbuzz-0.dll) mingw32(libstdc++-6.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32(user32.dll) mingw32(usp10.dll) mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 pkgconfig rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm -qp --provides ~/Downloads/mingw32-harfbuzz-0.9.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw32(libharfbuzz-0.dll) mingw32-harfbuzz = 0.9.3-1.fc19 $ md5sum ~/Downloads/harfbuzz-0.9.3.tar.bz2 883a40644d3b120b7013e11876ea5af3 /home/michael/Downloads/harfbuzz-0.9.3.tar.bz2 $ md5sum ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/harfbuzz-0.9.3.tar.bz2 883a40644d3b120b7013e11876ea5af3 /home/michael/rpmbuild/SOURCES/harfbuzz-0.9.3.tar.bz2 + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable * Overridden by MinGW guidelines [+] Files are installed in /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= xx is in the .spec file [+] Requires are OK [+] BuildArch: noarch [+] No man pages or info files [+] default strip and objdump commands are overridden with mingw32 specific ones [+] rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] 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. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [/] 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. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. [/] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. [/] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [/] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [/] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [*] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [+] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). [/] 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: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [*] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [/] 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. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [/] 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. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See MockTricks for details on how to do this. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. [/] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [+] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [*] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. [/] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. Looks good to me. APPROVED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 851848] Review Request: mingw-harfbuzz - MinGW Windows Harfbuzz library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851848 Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mike(a)cchtml.com --- Comment #1 from Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> --- Taking for review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 830387] Review Request: mingw-xz - MinGW package for xz compression utilities
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830387 --- Comment #3 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> --- The native Fedora xz package got updated to version 5.1.2alpha some weeks ago. You might want to update to that version as well -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
11
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

mingw August 2012