June 2011 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 1316] New: Review Request: ffms2 - An FFmpeg based source library for easy frame accurate access

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1316 Summary: Review Request: ffms2 - An FFmpeg based source library for easy frame accurate access 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: rpm(a)greysector.net CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 SPEC: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/ffms2.spec SRPM: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/ffms2-2.13-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: FFmpegSource (usually known as FFMS or FFMS2) is a cross-platform wrapper library around FFmpeg, plus some additional components to deal with file formats FFmpeg's libavformat has (or used to have) problems with. It gives you an easy, convenient way to say "open and decompress this media file for me, I don't care how you do it" and get frame- and sample-accurate access (usually), without having to bother with the sometimes less than straightforward and less than perfectly documented FFmpeg API. The library is written in C++, but the public API is C-friendly and it should be possible to simply include and link directly with a pure C application. The source is available under the MIT license, but the binaries are GPL licensed because they need to be linked against a GPL'd FFmpeg. Why not in Fedora? It's a wrapper around FFmpeg with strict dependency. $ rpmlint ffms2* ffms2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libavformat -> informative, malformation, informatics ffms2.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://ffmpegsource.googlecode.com/files/ffms2-2.13_src.7z HTTP Error 404: Not Found ffms2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libavformat -> informative, malformation, informatics ffms2.x86_64: W: no-documentation ffms2-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) ffms -> fums, ff ms, ff-ms ffms2-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ffms -> fums, ff ms, ff-ms ffms2-tools.x86_64: W: no-documentation ffms2-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ffmsindex 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 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.

12 years, 6 months

1
6
0 / 0

[Bug 1453] New: Review Request: libaacs - Open implementation of AACS specification

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1453 Summary: Review Request: libaacs - Open implementation of AACS specification 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: xavier(a)bachelot.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/libaacs.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/libaacs-0.1-0.1.20100817.fc13.src.rpm Description: This library is an open implementation of the AACS specification. It can be dlopen'ed by libbluray if present and allows decryption of AACS protected bluray disc. The keys are NOT provided. This package was rejected by Red Hat Legal team. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625603 It depends on libbluray, which is under review for Fedora. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625602 I'm already a Fedora packager, but I don't maintain any package for RPM Fusion. -- 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, 6 months

1
10
0 / 0

[Bug 1595] New: Review request: tarsnap - Online encrypted backup service (client)

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1595 Summary: Review request: tarsnap - Online encrypted backup service (client) 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: ricky(a)rzhou.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec: http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/tarsnap/tarsnap.spec SRPM: http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/tarsnap/tarsnap-1.0.27-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Tarsnap is an online encrypted backup service. It presents a tar-like command-line interface, but stores data online rather than locally; using ideas taken from the author's FreeBSD Update and Portsnap utilities, it maximizes performance by recognizing duplicate data and only storing it once, and cryptographically encrypts and signs archives using locally-held keys in order to guarantee that nobody without access to the key file (including the author) can read or modify archives. Reason it cannot be in Fedora: This package cannot be included in Fedora because it contains code under the following license: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, without modification, is permitted for the sole purpose of using the "tarsnap" backup service provided by Colin Percival. rpmlint output: tarsnap-1.0.27-1.fc14.src.rpm: tarsnap.src: W: invalid-license Tarsnap License 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. tarsnap-1.0.27-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm: tarsnap.x86_64: W: invalid-license Tarsnap License tarsnap.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/tarsnap.conf.sample 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. This is my first RPM Fusion package (I am a Fedora packager). -- 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, 7 months

1
10
0 / 0

[Bug 1171] New: Review request: rtmpdump - Toolkit for RTMP streams

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1171 Summary: Review request: rtmpdump - Toolkit for RTMP streams 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: dwmw2(a)infradead.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec: http://david.woodhou.se/rtmpdump.spec SRPM: http://david.woodhou.se/rtmpdump-2.2c-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: rtmpdump is a toolkit for RTMP streams. All forms of RTMP are supported, including rtmp://, rtmpt://, rtmpe://, rtmpte://, and rtmps://. Not suitable for Fedora because it was subject to a DMCA takedown request because it "can be used to download copyrighted works"... much like a web browser can: http://www.chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/notice.cgi?NoticeID=25159 rpmlint whines about spelling errors on the names of the various rtmp-based protocols, but has no valid objections. -- 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, 8 months

1
8
0 / 0

[Bug 1816] New: Review request: minidlna - Lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server targeted at embedded systems

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1816 Summary: Review request: minidlna - Lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server targeted at embedded systems 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.lesloueizeh.com/musuruan/minidlna.spec http://www.lesloueizeh.com/musuruan/minidlna-1.0.20-1.fc15.src.rpm * Description: MiniDLNA (aka ReadyDLNA) is server software with the aim of being fully compliant with DLNA/UPnP-AV clients. The minidlna daemon serves media files (music, pictures, and video) to clients on your network. Example clients include applications such as Totem and XBMC, and devices such as portable media players, smartphones, and televisions. * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: It requires ffmpeg. * Rpmlint: $ rpmlint /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/minidlna-1.0.20-1.fc15.src.rpm minidlna.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US smartphones -> smart phones, smart-phones, earphones minidlna.src: W: invalid-url Source2: minidlna-1.0.18-debian-manpages.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/andrea/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/minidlna-1.0.20-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm minidlna.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US smartphones -> smart phones, smart-phones, earphones minidlna.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /etc/minidlna.conf minidlna minidlna.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /etc/minidlna.conf minidlna minidlna.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/minidlna-1.0.20/LICENCE 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/andrea/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/minidlna-debuginfo-1.0.20-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm minidlna-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/minidlna-1.0.20/log.h minidlna-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/minidlna-1.0.20/log.c 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. I ignored spelling errors. The incorrect FSF address has been reported upstream and already fixed in CVS: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1121516&aid=3321927&grou... Non standard UID/GID are necessary for starting the daemon from a non root user. * Notes: This is my first package that has a systemd unit file. I will submit this file upstream after this review request will be approved. -- 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, 8 months

1
2
0 / 0

[Bug 195] New: Review request: perl-Crypt-IDEA - Perl interface to IDEA block cipher

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195 Summary: Review request: perl-Crypt-IDEA - Perl interface to IDEA block cipher Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-IDEA/ OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: paul(a)city-fan.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-IDEA/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec SRPM URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Crypt-IDEA/perl-Crypt-IDEA-1.08... This perl extension is an implementation of the IDEA block cipher algorithm. The module implements the Crypt::BlockCipher interface. The IDEA algorithm is patented in Europe and the United States by Ascom-Tech AG. The package is rpmlint-clean. This is my first RPM Fusion package; I am a sponsor in Fedora and have already been sponsored for RPM Fusion cvs access by Thorsten Leemhuis. -- 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, 9 months

3
22
0 / 0

[Bug 1806] New: Review request: Opera 11.50 beta

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1806 Summary: Review request: Opera 11.50 beta 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: patryk.obara(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Disclaimer: I am Opera employee, but I am submitting this not during my work hours, consider me volunteer with inside knowledge of Opera Software ;) Opera has been in rpmfusion wishlist for long time already: > they welcome if anyone wants to mirror their packages but it doesn't say anything about if they allow repackaging and such. Well, there was a bit of confusion after we changed our EULA few years ago, but it is sorted out for long time already. See paragraph 2 in http://www.opera.com/eula/browser-linux/ - it explicitly states that you are free to distribute opera, as long as it's free to end users (as in beer) and not for embedded systems. And by software we mean binaries, not package itself - we are perfectly ok with repackaging. In fact, some distributions (Arch, Slackware, Gentoo) are repackaging Opera again already, and we are extremely happy about that :). Now, technical stuff: - installer included in tar.xz packages doesn't install files in places recommended by fedora packaging guidelines, that's why some directories and files needs to be moved in %install section - opera tries to keep it's dependencies count as low as possible - for 32bit binaries build-in rpm dependency generator works ok, but for 64bit packages it generates way too much stuff - that's why there is small dependency filter included - this specfile is not for stable release, but for beta - that's because we would rather prepare for next stable release than submit rather old Opera 11.11 - included pre/post scripts differ significantly from official opera packages, but that's because official packages are supposed to be distribution-agnostic - opera comes with small wrapper application for 32bit plugins; in 64bit packages this binary lands in /usr/lib64 with rest of opera binaries, but I don't think it's really a problem - I am somewhat experienced with rpmbuild, specfiles, etc, but I was never officially mentored in fedora packaging ;) * Full URLs to the spec file and source rpm of the package: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/420606/fedora-packages/opera.spec http://dl.dropbox.com/u/420606/fedora-packages/opera-11.50-1.1027.beta1.f... * A short description for the package: Opera is a small, fast, customizable, powerful and user-friendly web browser, as well as an Internet suite, including an email client, an IRC client, web developer tools (Opera Dragonfly), and a personal web server (Opera Unite). * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: non-free software * The output rpmlint gives on both the source and binary packages. Explain for each message why you've chosen to ignore it. > $ rpmlint opera-11.50-1.1027.beta1.fc15.x86_64.rpm > opera.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization rpmlint error > opera.x86_64: W: invalid-license Proprietary rpmlint report all non-free licenses with warning > $ rpmlint opera-11.50-1.1027.beta1.fc15.src.rpm > opera.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization > opera.src: W: invalid-license Proprietary > opera.src: W: strange-permission filter-requires.sh 0755L I don't see anything weird about this; dependency generator script needs to be executable. > opera.src:55: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib This hardcoded path is hardcoded also in installation script, it appears in %install section; libdir macro obviously shouldn't be used here. > opera.src: W: no-%build-section Because I am repackaging tarball containing binaries. -- 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, 9 months

1
9
0 / 0

[Bug 1673] New: Review Request: mod_h264_streaming - H264 streaming module for the Apache HTTP Server

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1673 Summary: Review Request: mod_h264_streaming - H264 streaming module for the Apache HTTP Server 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 Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/mod_h264_streaming.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/mod_h264_streaming-2.2.7-1.src.rpm Description: H264 streaming module enable viewers to immediately jump to any part of the video regardless of the length of the video or whether it has all been downloaded yet. It also supports 'virtual video clips', so it can be specified to only playback a part of the video or create download links to specific parts of the video. If the video is already using the widely adopted MPEG4/H264 industry standard, there's no need to recode MP4 videos, the existing video files can be used. This version is free if you agree to the noncommercial license. Please mention its use on your website, in the lines of 'This website uses H264 pseudo video streaming technology by CodeShop'. The commercial license is inexpensive, see the following link if you need a commercial license: http://h264.code-shop.com/trac/wiki/Mod-H264-Streaming-License-Version2 This package needs to go to nonfree, because only non-commercial usage is freely allowed. -- 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, 9 months

1
11
0 / 0

[Bug 1530] New: Review request: gstreamer-vaapi - A collection of VA-API based plugins for GStreamer and helper libraries

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1530 Summary: Review request: gstreamer-vaapi - A collection of VA-API based plugins for GStreamer and helper 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: adamwill(a)shaw.ca CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 spec: http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/gstreamer-vaapi.spec SRPM: http://www.happyassassin.net/extras/gstreamer-vaapi-0.2.5-1.aw_fc14.src.rpm Description: Gstreamer-vaapi is a collection of VA-API based plugins for GStreamer and helper libraries. vaapidecode is used to decode MPEG-2, MPEG-4, H.264, VC-1, WMV3 videos to video/x-vaapi-surface surfaces, depending on the underlying HW capabilities. vaapiconvert is used to convert from video/x-raw-yuv pixels to video/x-vaapi-surface surfaces. vaapisink is used to display video/x-vaapi-surface surfaces to the screen. Executive summary: this lets gstreamer-based players (Totem and so on) use vaapi playback acceleration. This has to go in Fusion because it builds against libva, which was refused for Fedora and is in Fusion. rpmlint output (source): [adamw@adam SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/gstreamer-vaapi-0.2.5-1.aw_fc14.src.rpm gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapidecode -> vapidness, overdecorate, videotape gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapiconvert -> convertiplane, inconvertible, unconvertible gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US yuv -> guv, yum, yup gstreamer-vaapi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapisink -> vapidness, appraising, vampish 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. reasons for ignoring: I spell better than rpmlint does. :) rpmlint output (binary): [adamw@adam SPECS]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/gstreamer-vaapi-0.2.5-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapidecode -> vapidness, overdecorate, videotape gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapiconvert -> convertiplane, inconvertible, unconvertible gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US yuv -> guv, yum, yup gstreamer-vaapi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vaapisink -> vapidness, appraising, vampish 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. reason for ignoring: ditto. -- 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, 9 months

1
5
0 / 0

[Bug 1489] New: Update of the existing foo2zjs package

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1489 Summary: Update of the existing foo2zjs package Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://foo2lava.rkkda.com/ OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: spam.mich.nicht.zu(a)googlemail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Created an attachment (id=529) --> (http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/attachment.cgi?id=529) modified spec file from repository The foo2zjs package in the repository seems to be outdated. I modified the original spec file and rebuild the package with new sources and added a new package containing icm files for color correction and firmware files. -- 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, 9 months

1
5
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers June 2011