December 2006 - package-review - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Bug 174377] Review Request: gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk

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: gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174377 ------- Additional Comments From Jochen(a)herr-schmitt.de 2006-12-05 11:58 EST ------- Now here the RPMs for the new final 2.3 release of gnu-smalltalk: SRPM: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/gnu-smalltalk/gnu-smalltalk-2.3-1.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/gnu-smalltalk/gnu-smalltalk.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 188477] Review Request: maildrop

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: maildrop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188477 ------- Additional Comments From johan-fedora(a)deds.nl 2006-12-05 10:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > Mike, are you going to pursue submitting this to fedora-extras? FYI: A courier-authlib RPM is the review process now #208064 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 208396] New: Review Request: v4l2-tool - Tool to get webcam usage Information

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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208396 Summary: Review Request: v4l2-tool - Tool to get webcam usage Information Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: panemade(a)gmail.com QAContact: fedora-package-review(a)redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/v4l2-tool/v4l2-tool.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/v4l2-tool/v4l2-tool-1.0.2-1.src.rpm Description: This package gives v4l2 device information of webcam. This package can only be used with gspca and uvcvideo kernel modules. Though both kernel modules are not in mainstream kernel, you can direclty download those kernel drivers and can use on FC systems without problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
9
0 / 0

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system

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: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147 ------- Additional Comments From pgregory(a)aqsis.org 2006-12-04 11:36 EST ------- I see, that makes sense, sort of. I'll have to take a look at our build current system and see what we can do. Maybe if we sort out the outstanding issues mentioned above, then freeze for review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system

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: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203(a)freenet.de 2006-12-04 11:31 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19) > > The reason is we can't review > > a package whose source cannot be verified upstream. > > What exactly do you mean by 'verified upstream'??? We need to use a globally available source for a source tarball, which we can compare the tarball inside of Fedora's buildsystem against. Otherwise arbrary "jerks" could tar up some files and put them into Fedora, claiming they were yours. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system

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: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-12-04 11:27 EST ------- Just a note that the version/release strings to use for snapshots are mandated by the Naming Guidelines and differ from the example above: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#SnapshotPackages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system

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: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147 ------- Additional Comments From pgregory(a)aqsis.org 2006-12-04 11:23 EST ------- > The reason is we can't review > a package whose source cannot be verified upstream. What exactly do you mean by 'verified upstream'??? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 167147] Review Request: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system

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: Aqsis - 3D Rendering system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167147 ------- Additional Comments From denis(a)poolshark.org 2006-12-04 11:06 EST ------- Same here, I would recommend to submit an SRPM based on a CVS snapshot, if only for the goal of going through the review process. After the package is approved, you can update it with the official 1.1.0 release. The reason is we can't review a package whose source cannot be verified upstream. I would recommend using a version such as "1.1.0-0.cvsYYYYMMDD.1.fc6". The leading '0.' in front of the snapshot date ensures that the version will always be inferior to "1.1.0-1" used when 1.1.0 is officially released. I'm having some problems making this aqsis package with k3d on my system: aqsis doesn't find the correct shaders no matter which one i try, which results in a white object rendered (ERROR: Shader "k3d_plank" not found), even though this works with my aqsis 1.0.1 package. I'm not sure if this is a k3d problem or not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi

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: mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 ------- Additional Comments From bruno_cornec(a)hp.com 2006-12-04 08:03 EST ------- mindi 1.2.0 (version available at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mindi-1.2.0-2.fc5.src.rpm) is now delivered without a binary busybox in it. Instead an additional package has been made (Cf: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mindi-busybox-1.2.1-2.fc5.src.rpm) I've not checked that all your remarks have been taken in account, even if I tried to. As 1.2.1 is planned to be delivered as soon as my current test are finished, I did not work on that in parallel. Now if you think the current status would allow for easier inclusion, let me know. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 187318] Review Request: mondo

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: mondo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187318 ------- Additional Comments From bruno_cornec(a)hp.com 2006-12-04 07:58 EST ------- the latest status on my side is available at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mondo-2.2.0-2.fc5.src.rpm Not all the previous remarks made on this bug report have been integrated :-( That's why I haven't given feedback till now. Version 2.2.1 should arrive soon (tests running now), and I hope to be able to fix most remaining problems with it. A snapshot is available at ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mondo-stable-1.fc5.src.rpm I hope that at that point inclusion will be easier. BTW as noted, first point is to fix mindi for inclusion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

package-review December 2006