[Bug 585] New: Review Request: z-push - ActiveSync over-the-air implementation for mobile syncing
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585
Summary: Review Request: z-push - ActiveSync over-the-air
implementation for mobile syncing
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rpmfusion-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Spec URL: [Will come very soon]
SRPM URL: [Will come very soon]
Description:
Z-push is an implementation of the ActiveSync protocol which is used
'over-the-air' for multi platform ActiveSync devices, including Windows
Mobile, iPhone, Sony Ericsson and Nokia mobile devices. With Z-push any
groupware can be connected and synced with these devices.
For use cases of Z-push with the Zarafa Outlook Sharing and Open Source
Collaboration, please use the prepared package zarafa-z-push.
I'll add the spec file and source rpm this evening or so, then I also will
set RF_NEW blocker. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498194 is a
blocker dependency as well. Before that, this package unluckily doesn't make
that much sense. Of course z-push is nice with IMAP and so as well, but the
main purpose is with Zarafa.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
12 years, 10 months
[Bug 789] New: Review request: moc - Music on Console
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789
Summary: Review request: moc - Music on Console
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
URL: http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rayllu(a)yahoo.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2,30
Estimated Hours: 0.0
http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
http://raylu.no-ip.org/moc/moc.spec
Description: MOC (music on console) is a console audio player for LINUX/UNIX.
This package is a modified version of the Fedora packages linked to from here:
http://moc.daper.net/download
MOC includes MP3 playback capabilities, which is why it's not eligible for the
Fedora repositories. Like the 2.4.0 i386 packages, I could split the decoder
plugins up and submit the MOC core to Fedora and the decoder plugins to RPM
Fusion (though I'm not clear on exactly what functionality is and isn't
allowed). Also to note is this review request in Fedora:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490210
The patch that I include allows the FFmpeg decoder plugin to build when
ffmpeg-devel is installed, but it seems a bit hackish.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/moc-2.4.4-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
However, I should note that the debug package gets:
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/moc-debuginfo-2.4.4-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
moc-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/moc-2.4.4/libltdl/.libs
moc-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/moc-2.4.4/libltdl/.libs
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
I am seeking a sponsor since this is my first package.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years
[Bug 459] New: Review request: nvidia-cuda-toolkit - NVIDIA CUDA Toolkit libraries
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459
Summary: Review request: nvidia-cuda-toolkit - NVIDIA CUDA
Toolkit libraries
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: xjakub(a)fi.muni.cz
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC:
http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/nvidia-cuda-toolkit/nvidia-cuda-toolki...
SRPM:
http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/nvidia-cuda-toolkit/nvidia-cuda-toolki...
Description:
NVIDIA(R)CUDA(TM) is a general purpose parallel computing architecture
that leverages the parallel compute engine in NVIDIA graphics
processing units (GPUs) to solve many complex computational problems
in a fraction of the time required on a CPU. It includes the CUDA
Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) and the parallel compute engine in
the GPU. To program to the CUDATM architecture, developers can, today,
use C, one of the most widely used high-level programming languages,
which can then be run at great performance on a CUDATM enabled
processor. Other languages will be supported in the future, including
FORTRAN and C++.
Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora:
Not open source.
rpmlint output:
>rpmlint ../SRPMS/nvidia-cuda-toolkit-2.1-1.src.rpm
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.src:53: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib
This is ok, even moving file from the hardcoded path.
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.src: W: no-%build-section
Nothing to build. This, however, implies no stripping & no debuginfo.
Unfortunately, debuginfo creation fails because the binaries don't contatin
build id. I don't know whether there is something I could do with this.
>rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/nvidia-cuda-toolkit-*
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/bec
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/inline
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/be
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/gfec
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/nvopencc
See the previous comment.
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libcufft.so.2.1
exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libcufftemu.so.2.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
nvidia-cuda-toolkit.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libcudart.so.2.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5
Again, there is nothing we can do with this, AFAIK.
This is my first RPM Fusion package, I'm already a Fedora packager (both FAS
names are mjakubicek). My primary motivation to package this is that I maintain
a CUDA-enabled application, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487981.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years
[Bug 775] New: Review request: xorg-x11-drv-psb - Intel GMA500 (Poulsbo) video driver (and associated packages)
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775
Summary: Review request: xorg-x11-drv-psb - Intel GMA500
(Poulsbo) video driver (and associated packages)
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: adamwill(a)shaw.ca
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Requesting a review for xorg-x11-drv-psb and several associated packages. This
is a driver for the Intel GMA 500 graphics chipset. The associated packages are
all required for the driver to work. This is the same driver I have been
publishing for a while on my blog at http://www.happyassassin.net/ .
SRPMs:
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/poulsbo/src/xorg-x11-drv-psb-0.31.0-8.fc...
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/poulsbo/src/libdrm-poulsbo-2.3.0-7.fc11....
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/poulsbo/src/psb-firmware-0.30-2.fc11.src...
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/poulsbo/src/psb-kmod-4.41.1-5.fc11.src.rpm
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/poulsbo/src/xpsb-glx-0.18-3.fc11.src.rpm
SPECs:
http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/xorg-x11-drv-psb.spec
http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/libdrm-poulsbo.spec
http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/psb-firmware.spec
http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/psb-kmod.spec
http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/xpsb-glx.spec
The driver needs to go in RPM Fusion due to licensing issues. The driver
itself, the modified libdrm it requires (libdrm-poulsbo) and the kernel module
it requires (psb-kmod) are open source. However, the driver is entirely
non-functional without the proprietary (but redistributable) packages
psb-firmware and xpsb-glx. I believe therefore that psb-firmware and xpsb-glx
should go in rpmfusion-nonfree. I'm not sure if the other packages should go in
rpmfusion-free or rpmfusion-nonfree. Since the driver has to contain explicit
Requires: for the firmware and xpsb-glx packages, I guess it should go in
nonfree, since dependencies from free to nonfree are probably not desirable.
Notes: this driver is the one from Ubuntu's custom edition that comes
pre-installed on Dell netbooks. libdrm-poulsbo is a customized build of libdrm
which is required (the X driver and kernel module won't build against a stock
libdrm). It is packaged to co-exist with the official libdrm package, but when
libdrm-poulsbo is installed, anything which is just linked against libdrm.so
will be using this customized version. In practice, it works well, I've been
running my own Poulsbo system with this setup for quite a while now. psb-kmod
is the kernel module (it's needed for the driver to work at all). psb-firmware
is some firmware which is required for the driver to work. xpsb-glx contains a
pre-built X.org library which is required for the driver to work, a pre-built
DRI library which is required for 3D acceleration to work, and a pre-built
module for 2D video playback acceleration via libva (I intend to submit a libva
package to Fedora main repos some time soon). All of these are only available
in pre-built form.
rpmlint notes:
akmod-psb.i586: E: devel-dependency libdrm-poulsbo-devel
akmod-psb.i586: E: explicit-lib-dependency libdrm-poulsbo-devel
akmod-psb.i586: W: no-documentation
the dependency is correct; the module needs libdrm-poulsbo-devel to be present
to build, so the akmod package must obviously require it. no-documentation - I
think this is normal for a kmod package? If not, please advise how to add docs.
libdrm-poulsbo.i586: E: explicit-lib-dependency libdrm
libdrm-poulsbo.i586: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ld.so.conf.d/psb.conf
the explicit lib dependency is intended; the main libdrm package includes a
couple of binary tools, and it's better to have libdrm-poulsbo require it
rather than have it also ship the tools and conflict with it. The config file
is also intended: there's no reason an end user should modify this file.
psb-firmware.i586: E: no-binary
psb-firmware.i586: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/psb-firmware-0.30/COPYING
it's just a firmware file. The package is arched because I believe the firmware
to be arch specific, not that there's ever going to be a Poulsbo graphics chip
in anything but an i586 system. I don't believe it's good practice to do a
character set conversion on a license file.
xorg-x11-drv-psb.i586: E: explicit-lib-dependency libdrm-poulsbo
xorg-x11-drv-psb.i586: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/modprobe.d/poulsbo.conf
xorg-x11-drv-psb.i586: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/psb
xorg-x11-drv-psb.i586: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/psb $name
xorg-x11-drv-psb.i586: W: incoherent-init-script-name psb ('xorg-x11-drv-psb',
'xorg-x11-drv-psbd')
the explicit lib dep is again intentional: it's the only way to ensure the
customized libdrm, not the main one, is used when the driver is installed. the
config file not being marked as a config file is intentional: there's no reason
for an end user to modify it, it simply causes the module to be loaded
automatically when a Poulsbo graphics chip is found. I'm not quite sure what
the incoherent-subsys warning means, but the script in question is based
directly on the one from the NVIDIA package. Ditto the
incoherent-init-script-name warning, I'm following the conventions from the
NVIDIA package.
This will be my first RPM Fusion package (set), if accepted. However, I am a
sponsored packager for Fedora itself, I maintain congruity and gst-mixer there.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 3 months
[Bug 740] New: Review request: meka - Multi machine emulator for MS-DOS, MS-Windows and GNU/Linux
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=740
Summary: Review request: meka - Multi machine emulator for MS-
DOS, MS-Windows and GNU/Linux
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: musuruan(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
http://www.webalice.it/musuruan/RPMS/reviews/meka.spec
http://www.webalice.it/musuruan/RPMS/reviews/meka-0.73-0.1.20080619.fc10....
* Description:
MEKA is a multi machine emulator, originally started as a Sega Master System
emulator, and generally very oriented toward Z80-based Sega 8-bit systems.
MEKA officially emulates the following systems:
- Sega Game 1000 / SG-1000 / Japan, Oceania
- Sega Computer 3000 / SC-3000 / Japan, Oceania, Europe
- Super Control Station / SF-7000 / Japan, Oceania, Europe
- Sega Mark III / MK3 / Japan
+ FM Unit Extension / MK3+FM / Japan
- Sega Master System / SMS / World Wide
- Sega Game Gear / GG / World Wide
- ColecoVision / COLECO / America, Europe
- Othello Multivision / OMV / Japan
You can play other systems on it only if you are smart enough to figure how.
And if you are, I doubt you will want to play Nintendo games. So forget it.
* Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora:
It requires ROMs (or image files in any format) of copyrighted material to be
useful and the owners of those copyrights and patents have not given their
express written permission.
* Rpmlint output:
meka.i386: W: invalid-license Distributable
meka.src: W: invalid-license Distributable
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 4 months
[Bug 562] New: Review request: catalyst-kmod - AMD display driver kernel module
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=562
Summary: Review request: catalyst-kmod - AMD display driver
kernel module
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: s.adam(a)diffingo.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 1.0
Description:
The catalyst 9.4 display driver kernel module.
SPEC: http://downloads.diffingo.com/rpmfusion/catalyst-kmod.spec
SRPM: http://downloads.diffingo.com/rpmfusion/catalyst-kmod-9.4-1.fc10.src.rpm
rpmlint output:
akmod-catalyst.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kmod-catalyst-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kmod-catalyst.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> No documentation needs to be included in these packages
kmod-catalyst-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized
catalyst kernel module(s) for 2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64
> due to kmodtool
kmod-catalyst-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64.x86_64: W:
filename-too-long-for-joliet
kmod-catalyst-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64-9.4-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
> Not a big deal: the file can be renamed if it's going to be used on Joliet-formatted media.
kmod-catalyst-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64.x86_64: W:
unstripped-binary-or-object
/lib/modules/2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64/extra/catalyst/fglrx.ko
> Set this intentionally as part of the debuginfo workaround: sed -i -e 's|strict=true|strict=false|' find-debuginfo.sh
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 4 months
[Bug 582] New: Review Request: libtxc_dxtn - S3 Texture Compression support libraries for Mesa
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=582
Summary: Review Request: libtxc_dxtn - S3 Texture Compression
support libraries for Mesa
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: andreas(a)bawue.net
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SRPM:
http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/libtxc_dxtn/libtxc_dxtn-0.0.0.070518-1.fc7.src.rpm
SPEC: http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/libtxc_dxtn/libtxc_dxtn.spec
Description:
S3 Texture Compression (S3TC) (sometimes also called DXTn or DXTC) is a group
of related lossy image compression algorithms originally developed by S3
Graphics, Ltd.
Currently, s3tc is supported by libtxc_dxtn on all graphic cards which use the
radeon, r200, i830 and i915 driver. Other DRI drivers are not supported, even
if the hardware could do it, at least not until someone writes the code for it.
Not eligible for fedora:
S3TC is patented.
rpmlint:
[andreas@workstation result]$ rpmlint -v *.rpm
libtxc_dxtn.i586: I: checking
libtxc_dxtn.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libtxc_dxtn.so
libtxc_dxtn.src: I: checking
libtxc_dxtn-debuginfo.i586: I: checking
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
no-soname is a shame, but I didn't want to meddle with upstream code as the
version number is horrible anyway.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 4 months
[Bug 461] New: Review Request: openmotif - Open Motif runtime libraries and executables
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461
Summary: Review Request: openmotif - Open Motif runtime libraries
and executables
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: Jochen(a)herr-schmitt.de
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/openmotif/openmotif.spec
SRPM: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/openmotif/openmotif-2.3.2-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description:
This is the Open Motif 2.3.2 runtime environment. It includes the
Motif shared libraries, needed to run applications which are dynamically
linked against Motif, and the Motif Window Manager "mwm".
You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/s4504kr
This is the Open Motif 2.3.2 runtime environment. It includes the
Motif shared libraries, needed to run applications which are dynamically
linked against Motif, and the Motif Window Manager "mwm".
You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/s4504kr
This is the Open Motif 2.3.2 runtime environment. It includes the
Motif shared libraries, needed to run applications which are dynamically
linked against Motif, and the Motif Window Manager "mwm".
You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/s4504kr
$ rpmlint openmotif-devel-2.3.2-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
openmotif-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Open Group Public License
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint openmotif-demos-2.3.2-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
openmotif-demos.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/Xm/fontsel/creation-c.c
openmotif-demos.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/Xm/earth/earth.c
openmotif-demos.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/Xm/wsm/wsm_cb.h
openmotif-demos.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/Xm/todo/io.c
$ rpmlint openmotif-mwm-2.3.2-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
openmotif-mwm.x86_64: W: invalid-license Open Group Public License
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Why not in Fedora?
Package contains a nonfree license:
Plese refer: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RexDieter/openmotif
Known issues:
opemmotif-devel has a conflict with lesstif-devel. But mesa-libGLw-devel
depends on lesstif-devel. So we need a virtual provides 'motif-devel' on
lesstif-devel and mesa-libGLw-devel.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
13 years, 8 months