[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.
14 years, 3 months
[Bug 1024] New: Review request: pushover - Fun puzzle game with dominos
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1024
Summary: Review request: pushover - Fun puzzle game with dominos
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
Spec URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/pushover.spec
SRPM URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/pushover-0.0.2-1.fc12.src.rpm
Description:
Rearrange the dominoes on the different platforms so that you can start a
chainreaction that makes all dominoes topple over.
Not eligible to be included in Fedora:
it uses some proprietary graphics from the original game.
rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/pushover-0.0.2-1.fc12.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint /home/andrea/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/pushover-0.0.2-1.fc12.x86_64.rpm
pushover.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/pushover/data/FreeSans.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/gnu-free/FreeSans.ttf
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint
/home/andrea/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/pushover-debuginfo-0.0.2-1.fc12.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
--
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.
14 years, 6 months
[Bug 802] New: Review request: openafs - Enterprise Network File System
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=802
Summary: Review request: openafs - Enterprise Network File System
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: jjneely(a)ncsu.edu
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
This is my first RPM Fusion package, however I am a Fedora sponsored packager.
These packages contain the userland bits for OpenAFS which depends on a 3rd
party kernel module.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjneely/SPECS/openafs.spec
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjneely/SRPMS/openafs-1.4.11-3.fc11.src.rpm
$ rpmlint openafs-1.4.11-3.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint openafs-1.4.11-3.fc11.i586.rpm
openafs.i586: W: executable-stack /usr/lib/libafssetpag.so.1.0
openafs.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libafsrpc.so.1.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.0
openafs.i586: W: executable-stack /usr/lib/libafsrpc.so.1.1
openafs.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libafsauthent.so.1.0
exit(a)GLIBC_2.0
openafs.i586: W: dangerous-command-in-%preun rm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Library issues: If we need to find/open a bug with the OpenAFS's bugtracker we
can, but I don't think it wise to make API/ABI chages only in the version
supplied by rpmfusion.
dangerous-command-in-%preun: Required to clean up the OpenAFS cache in
/var/cache/openafs
$ rpmlint openafs-client-1.4.11-3.fc11.i586.rpm
openafs-client.i586: W: no-documentation
openafs-client.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/openafs 0700
Documentation provided in parent package. The cache directory must only be
readable by root to avoid users being able to see other users' data.
$ rpmlint openafs-devel-1.4.11-3.fc11.i586.rpm
openafs-devel.i586: W: no-documentation
openafs-devel.i586: E: zero-length /usr/include/afs/osi_inode.h
I can remove osi_inode.h if needed. It is empty in the distribution tar ball.
$ rpmlint openafs-server-1.4.11-3.fc11.i586.rpm
openafs-server.i586: W: no-documentation
--
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.
14 years, 6 months
[Bug 803] New: Review request: openafs-kmod - Kernel Modules
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=803
Summary: Review request: openafs-kmod - Kernel Modules
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: jjneely(a)ncsu.edu
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
This is the matching kernel module for the OpenAFS packages.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjneely/SPECS/openafs-kmod.spec
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjneely/SRPMS/openafs-kmod-1.4.11-1.fc11.src.rpm
$ rpmlint openafs-kmod-1.4.11-1.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint kmod-openafs-1.4.11-1.fc11.i586.rpm
kmod-openafs.i586: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint kmod-openafs-2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE-1.4.11-1.fc11.i686.rpm
kmod-openafs-2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE.i686: W: summary-not-capitalized
openafs kernel module(s) for 2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE
kmod-openafs-2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE.i686: W:
unstripped-binary-or-object
/lib/modules/2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE/extra/openafs/openafs.ko
kmod-openafs-2.6.29.6-217.2.16.fc11.i686.PAE.i686: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
I believe the above rpmlintage is pretty normal for kmods.
--
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.
14 years, 6 months
[Bug 952] New: Review request: Maelstrom - Space combat game
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=952
Summary: Review request: Maelstrom - Space combat game
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: j.w.r.degoede(a)hhs.nl
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Estimated Hours: 0.0
SPEC: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/Maelstrom.spec
SRPM:
http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/Maelstrom-3.0.6-19.fc12.src.rpm
Description :
Maelstrom is a space combat game, originally ported from the Macintosh
platform. Brave pilots get to dodge asteroids and fight off other
ships at the same time.
Note eligible for Fedora:
It has just been blocked from rawhide because the data is non free:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529907
Note that the specfile is almost unchanged from the Fedora one, so this should
be a simple review (I did some minor cleanups).
rpmlint output:
Maelstrom.src: W: invalid-license Distributable
Maelstrom.x86_64: W: invalid-license Distributable
Maelstrom-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license Distributable
Duh, that is why it is going to rpmfusion.
Maelstrom.x86_64: E: score-file-must-not-be-conffile
/var/lib/games/Maelstrom-Scores
This is just plain wrong, if the high score file is not marked
%config(noreplace), then the highscores will get reset to their defaults with
each package update.
Maelstrom.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/Maelstrom 02755
This is for the shared highscore file.
--
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.
14 years, 7 months
rpmfusion and no frozen rawhide
by Hans de Goede
Hi All,
So how are we going to handle the new no frozen rawhide ?
I see 2 options:
1) As soon as the branching point between rawhide and
the pending next release (iow F-13 atm) has been reached
(which is today). Change our buildsys mock setups to make
builds for devel build from the new development/F-##
repo. And delay forking until the final release of F-##
gets real close. The advantage of doing this is that it is
slightly less work, the disadvantage is that we have no
repo tracking the real rawhide, which could lead to dep
problems for people who want to keep consuming rawhide after
the branch.
2) Do early branching, just like Fedora does. We could make it
a bit easier on ourselves by immediately putting the new
F-## repo next to the already released repo's instead of
putting it under development like Fedora does.
Regards,
Hans
14 years, 7 months