April 2006 - package-review - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Bug 189725] New: Review Request: ifolder3-server

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=189725 Summary: Review Request: ifolder3-server Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink(a)leemhuis.info ReportedBy: michael(a)knox.net.nz QAContact: fedora-package-review(a)redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/fedora_extras/iFolder3/ifolder3-server.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/fedora_extras/iFolder3/ifolder3-server-3.5.6108.1-... Description: The iFolder-server provides a server for Personal Backup, File access any time and any where, and document based collaboration. iFolder allows users to create iFolders on their client machines and sync the contents of those files to the server as a backup. iFolders can also be shared with other iFolder users defined in the server. -- 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, 1 month

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML

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: mosml - Moscow ML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169704 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald(a)gmail.com 2006-04-30 17:24 EST ------- Nope. ld -shared -o libmgmp.so intinf.o /usr/lib/libgmp.so ld: /usr/lib/libgmp.so: No such file: No such file or directory -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[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 j.w.r.degoede(a)hhs.nl 2006-04-30 16:57 EST ------- Sorry, no more time (today) for a full review. I did build it and ran it through rpmlint: W: ctapi-cyberjack strange-permission ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8.tar.bz2 0744 W: ctapi-cyberjack strange-permission ctapi-cyberjack.spec 0600 You should fix these, easy. E: ctapi-cyberjack library-not-linked-against-libc /usr/lib64/libctapi-cyberjack.so.0 Hmm, bad error! Probably something wrong with the link command I can look into this one for you if you want, just let me know. W: ctapi-cyberjack devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libctapi-cyberjack.so That should be fixed, easy. E: ctapi-cyberjack library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libctapi-cyberjack.so.0 E: ctapi-cyberjack library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libctapi-cyberjack.so.0 2 more which you should fix. W: ctapi-cyberjack-devel no-documentation No problem E: ctapi-cyberjack-pcsc library-not-linked-against-libc /libcyberjack_ifd.so Again probably the strange ld invocation, let me know if you need help W: ctapi-cyberjack-pcsc conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/reader.conf.d/cyberjack.conf Amke tbis %config(noreplace) W: ctapi-cyberjack-pcsc no-documentation No problem E: ctapi-cyberjack-pcsc executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/reader.conf.d/cyberjack.conf E: ctapi-cyberjack-pcsc script-without-shellbang /etc/reader.conf.d/cyberjack.conf The second one is becayse of the first one, change the mode of this to 644. I think a new version fixing this before the fullreview is a good idea, don't hesitate if you need help with the not linked to libc errors, that should be easy to fix for me. -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 182320] Review Request: gnome-build

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: gnome-build https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182320 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald(a)gmail.com 2006-04-30 16:09 EST ------- Missing some things when building against developement: No Package Found for gnome-libs-devel No Package Found for gtkhtml-devel No Package Found for libglade-devel >= 2.0.1 No Package Found for gal-devel No Package Found for oaf-devel I'm not too familiar with Gnome devel packaging, but you'll probably want to change to the lastest gtkhtml3-devel, and you'll have to change libglade-devel to libglade2-devel to meet the version requirement. -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 188496] Review Request: PyQt-qscintilla

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: PyQt-qscintilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188496 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter(a)math.unl.edu 2006-04-30 14:26 EST ------- We can/will just use the same source redhat/fedora(core) does when building PyQt-qscintilla. Re: rawhide breakage That's ok, rawhide was upgraded to PyQt-3.16 recently anyway. Whoever wants to review this can do so against the FC-5 package here, or I can make a rawhide one for PyQt-3.16 too. (I'll have to do that eventually anyway). -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[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 2006-04-30 14:00 EST ------- OK here the source rpm it contains the code for FC5 and the remarks for FC4. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8-6.src... -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[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 j.w.r.degoede(a)hhs.nl 2006-04-30 13:40 EST ------- Erm: [hans@shalem ~]$ rpmbuild -ba /usr/src/redhat/SPECS/ctapi-cyberjack.spec error: File /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/ctapi-cyberjack_MakefileCtAPI.patch: No such file or directory Thats why usually wy prefer SRPM's for reviews. -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 166427] Review Request: inform - Compiler for Z-machine story files

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: inform - Compiler for Z-machine story files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166427 ------- Additional Comments From chris(a)chrisgrau.com 2006-04-30 13:14 EST ------- Sorry about the silence. I'll contact the author today. Thanks for the ping guys. -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 187326] Review Request: smokeping - Network latency grapher

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: smokeping - Network latency grapher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187326 ------- Additional Comments From rmo(a)sunnmore.net 2006-04-30 10:56 EST ------- Since smokeping runs as a daemon, I guess the smokeping binary should be in /usr/sbin instead of /usr/bin -- 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, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit

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: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 ------- Additional Comments From che666(a)gmail.com 2006-04-30 09:08 EST ------- for getting the package to build without rpath problems on x86_64 you have to add autoreconf --force --install a line before %configure -- 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, 1 month

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 April 2006