April 2013 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 2146] New: Review Request: multicat - Simple and efficient multicast and transport stream manipulation

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2146 Bug #: 2146 Summary: Review Request: multicat - Simple and efficient multicast and transport stream manipulation Classification: Unclassified 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: kwizart(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Group: Package Reviews SRPM: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/vlc/multicat-2.0-1.fc16.src.rpm SPEC: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/vlc/multicat.spec Summary: Simple and efficient multicast and transport stream manipulation Depends on bitstream -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 2 months

1
2
0 / 0

[Bug 2550] New: Review request: wl-bcm43142-kmod - X86_64 Kernel module for Broadcom wireless devices BCM43142

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2550 Bug #: 2550 Summary: Review request: wl-bcm43142-kmod - X86_64 Kernel module for Broadcom wireless devices BCM43142 Classification: Unclassified Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: nicolas.vieville(a)univ-valenciennes.fr CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org SPEC file: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/rpmfusion/F-18/wl-bcm43142-kmod/wl-bcm43... SRPMS file: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/rpmfusion/F-18/wl-bcm43142-kmod/wl-bcm43... Sources URL: http://jas.gemnetworks.com/wireless-bcm43142/ Description: These packages contain x86_64 Broadcom's IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n hybrid Linux device driver for use with Broadcom's BCM43142-based hardware also known as Broadcom bcm4365 or Dell 1704 wireless device. rpmlint wl-bcm43142-kmod.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint wl-bcm43142-kmod-6.20.55.19-1.fc18.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Package not eligible to be included in Fedora as it contains some non-modifiable binary. As the maintainer of the actual wl-kmod package for rpmfusion, a user asked me if I could provide the last broadcom wireless drivers for BCM43142-based hardware, because this chipset is not driven by the actual package. He pointed me to the actual maintainer site of this package for Debian, and these packages (broadcom-wl-bcm43142 review request will follow) are largely inspired from this site (http://jas.gemnetworks.com/wireless-bcm43142/). The original package was shipped with Ubuntu's Dell laptop, but as far as I know (digging the Web for 2 days) neither Broadcom or Dell provided on their websites any sources for this driver. The only source cited by the Debian packager is actually this site: http://wielki.tk/vostro/ According to message #60 in this thread http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688823#60, Broadcom will not update the official Broadcom STA driver (aka 5.100.82.112) as the new one was a Dell/Ubuntu specific only. While preparing these packages, I had to make some choices and I wonder if someone could review and comment them if needed: 1. These new package are x86_64 architecture only. Broadcom/Dell didn't provided any binary library for i386 (32 bits) platform. I had to make these packages x86_64 platform only by adding a "ExclusiveArch: x86_64" directive in the SPEC file, and adding checking in the %prep section of this file too. Is this correct? 2. As this new driver doesn't work with some older Broadcom chipset (mine is bcm4313 and doesn't work with it for example) that still work correctly with 5.100.82.112 driver, I didn't choice to use conflict directive in the SPEC file. If one has a new chipset in his laptop and plug-in an old one via USB port the problem will be unsolvable. I preferred to rename the new build module with a different name to let users deal with there configuration more smoothly (I hope that modifying some udev rules might be necessary to get them working). So the new build module was rename from wl.ko to wl_bcm43142.ko at build time. Is this correct, or am I wrong? 3. As stated by all the users owning such laptop and wanting to upgrade their original Ubuntu 11.10 to the last 12.04 or 12.10, this chipset is hybrid but actually no bluetooth is working. Some efforts are made by Ubuntu developers to get it working, but for the moment this part of the chipset is not supported (see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/863051/+index?commen...). What is the best thing to do to inform users of such a limitation in this package? 4. After all, is it worth packaging this driver? I can provide rawhide SPEC and SRPMS files if needed. I plan to make it available since F-17 if accepted. Same request made for the broadcom-wl-bcm43142 package. As I do not own myself such a device, I would not be able to test new packages as they would be build. Are there any volunteers to achieve this task? Last question: as I'm already a rpmfusion packager, but not so experienced, do I need a sponsor? Thanks in advance for your comments. Cordially, -- NVieville -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 2 months

1
19
0 / 0

[Bug 2549] New: Review request: broadcom-wl-bcm43142 - Common files for Broadcom 802.11 STA driver for BCM43142 devices

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2549 Bug #: 2549 Summary: Review request: broadcom-wl-bcm43142 - Common files for Broadcom 802.11 STA driver for BCM43142 devices Classification: Unclassified Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: nicolas.vieville(a)univ-valenciennes.fr CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org SPEC file: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/rpmfusion/F-18/broadcom-wl-bcm43142/broa... SRPMS file: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25699833/rpmfusion/F-18/broadcom-wl-bcm43142/broa... Sources URL: http://jas.gemnetworks.com/wireless-bcm43142/ Description: This package contains the license, copyright and configuration files for the Broadcom 802.11 Linux STA Driver for WiFi, a Linux device driver for use with Broadcom's BCM43142-based hardware also known as Broadcom bcm4365 or Dell 1704 wireless device. rpmlint broadcom-wl-bcm43142.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint broadcom-wl-bcm43142-6.20.55.19-1.fc18.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Package not eligible to be included in Fedora as it contains some non-modifiable binary. As the maintainer of the actual broadcom-wl package for rpmfusion, a user asked me if I could provide the last broadcom wireless drivers for BCM43142-based hardware, because this chipset is not driven by the actual package. He pointed me to the actual maintainer site of this package for Debian, and these packages (wl-bcm43142-kmod review request will follow) are largely inspired from this site (http://jas.gemnetworks.com/wireless-bcm43142/). The original package was shipped with Ubuntu's Dell laptop, but as far as I know (digging the Web for 2 days) neither Broadcom or Dell provided on their websites any sources for this driver. The only source cited by the Debian packager is actually this site: http://wielki.tk/vostro/ According to message #60 in this thread http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688823#60, Broadcom will not update the official Broadcom STA driver (aka 5.100.82.112) as the new one was a Dell/Ubuntu specific only. While preparing these packages, I had to make some choices and I wonder if someone could review and comment them if needed: 1. These new package are x86_64 architecture only. Broadcom/Dell didn't provided any binary library for i386 (32 bits) platform. I had to make these packages x86_64 platform only by adding a "ExclusiveArch: x86_64" directive in the SPEC file, and adding checking in the %prep section of this file too. Is this correct? 2. As this new driver doesn't work with some older Broadcom chipset (mine is bcm4313 and doesn't work with it for example) that still work correctly with 5.100.82.112 driver, I didn't choice to use conflict directive in the SPEC file. If one has a new chipset in his laptop and plug-in an old one via USB port the problem will be unsolvable. I preferred to rename the new build module with a different name to let users deal with there configuration more smoothly (I hope that modifying some udev rules might be necessary to get them working). So the new build module was rename from wl.ko to wl_bcm43142.ko at build time. Is this correct, or am I wrong? 3. As stated by all the users owning such laptop and wanting to upgrade their original Ubuntu 11.10 to the last 12.04 or 12.10, this chipset is hybrid but actually no bluetooth is working. Some efforts are made by Ubuntu developers to get it working, but for the moment this part of the chipset is not supported (see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/863051/+index?commen...). What is the best thing to do to inform users of such a limitation in this package? 4. After all, is it worth packaging this driver? I can provide rawhide SPEC and SRPMS files if needed. I plan to make it available for F-17 if accepted. Same request made for the wl-bcm43142-kmod package. As I do not own myself such a device, I would not be able to test new packages as they would be build. Are there any volunteers to achieve this task? Last question: as I'm already a rpmfusion packager, but not so experienced, do I need a sponsor? Thanks in advance for your comments. Cordially, -- NVieville -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 2 months

1
5
0 / 0

[Bug 2401] New: catalyst-legacy-kmod

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2401 Bug #: 2401 Summary: catalyst-legacy-kmod Classification: Unclassified 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: leigh123linux(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org catalyst-legacy-kmod SPEC: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6907158/catalyst-legacy/catalyst-legacy-kmod.spec SRPM: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6907158/catalyst-legacy/catalyst-legacy-kmod-12.... -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
11
0 / 0

[Bug 2414] New: Review Request: qtractor-freeworld - enable libmad MP3 support for qtractor

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2414 Bug #: 2414 Summary: Review Request: qtractor-freeworld - enable libmad MP3 support for qtractor Classification: Unclassified 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: brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org qtractor (Audio/MIDI multitrack sequencer) had existed with full MP3 support for quite some time. Qtractor has since been reviewed and accepted into Fedora main repositories with MP3 support disabled. Thanks to Oracan Ogetbil, we now have a patch which provides dynamic MP3 libmad support. This package provides a shared library to utilize libmad if present. SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor-freeworld-0.5.5-1.fc17.src.rpm SPEC: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor-freeworld.spec Links to the patched Fedora package: SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor-0.5.5-1.fc17.src.rpm SPEC: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor.spec I am a maintainer in Fedora, however this is my first RPMFusion package. I am also maintaining the Fedora qtractor base package rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/qtractor-freeworld-0.5.5-1.fc17.src.rpm ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/qtractor-freeworld-0.5.5-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm qtractor-freeworld.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi -> mulch, mufti qtractor-freeworld.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti qtractor-freeworld.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi -> mulch, mufti qtractor-freeworld.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
27
0 / 0

[Bug 2492] New: Review request: mame-data-extras - Extra data files for MAME

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2492 Bug #: 2492 Summary: Review request: mame-data-extras - Extra data files for MAME Classification: Unclassified 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: belegdol(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Spec URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/belegdol/mame-data-extras.spec SRPM URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/belegdol/mame-data-extras-0.147-1.fc19.src.rpm This is a rewrite of the sdlmame-data package, incorporating some of the files left out after MAME/MESS merge and adding some new ones. Not everything is up-to-date with 0.147 yet, but I'd rather get the review started sooner and update the files later. Should be an easy one :) -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
21
0 / 0

[Bug 2686] New: Review request: profile-sync-daemon - Offload browser profiles to RAM for speed a wear reduction

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2686 Bug #: 2686 Summary: Review request: profile-sync-daemon - Offload browser profiles to RAM for speed a wear reduction Classification: Unclassified 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: graysky(a)archlinux.us CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2, 30 *Spec file: http://repo-ck.com/private/profile-sync-daemon.spec *Source rpm: http://repo-ck.com/private/profile-sync-daemon-5.22-1.fc18.src.rpm *Description: Symlinks and syncs browser profiles to RAM via tmpfs which will reduce HDD/SDD calls and speed-up browsers. *Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: I believe that it is eligible. *The output rpmlint gives on both the source and binary packages: profile-sync-daemon.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Symlinks -> Slinks profile-sync-daemon.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tmpfs -> tamps profile-sync-daemon.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib profile-sync-daemon.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/psd.conf profile-sync-daemon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Symlinks -> Slinks profile-sync-daemon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tmpfs -> tamps profile-sync-daemon.src:39: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 39, tab: line 1) 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. *Explain for each message why you've chosen to ignore it: The spelling errors are not correct as typed. I do not understand the warning on line 3 or on line 4. The warning on line 6 refers to my use of tabs throughout in the main body of the spec file but not in my %post scriptlet. *This is by first RPM Fusion package and I am seeking sponsorship. -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
2
0 / 0

[Bug 2528] New: Review request: librcc - Russian Charset Conversion Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2528 Bug #: 2528 Summary: Review request: librcc - Russian Charset Conversion Library Classification: Unclassified 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: anto.trande(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Depends on: 2527 Blocks: 2, 30 Provides possibility to automatically convert considered encoding (a lot of languages is supported, not only Russian one) to/from UTF-8. The library is part of RUSXMMS patch. http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/librcc.spec http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/librcc-0.2.9-0.fc17.src.rpm $ rpmlint librcc-0.2.9-0.fc17.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint librcc-0.2.9-0.fc17.i686.rpm librcc.i686: E: explicit-lib-dependency librcd librcc.i686: W: non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/rcc-config 0644L librcc.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/rcc-config librcc.i686: E: non-executable-script /usr/bin/rcc-config 0644L /bin/bash 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings. I think, rcc-config stuff is related to other tools. $ cat /usr/bin/rcc-config #!/bin/bash echo "Configuration UI is not available!" This is my first package; please, I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 2527] New: Review request:librcd - Russian Encoding Detection Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2527 Bug #: 2527 Summary: Review request:librcd - Russian Encoding Detection Library Classification: Unclassified 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: anto.trande(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2, 30 Automatic encoding detection library for Russian/Ukrainian languages. Optimized for very small words and phrases. http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/librcd.spec http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/librcd-0.1.13-0.fc17.src.rpm Together with librcc, librcd is a dependence for MOC 'Music On Console Player'. $ rpmlint librcd-0.1.13-0.fc17.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint librcd-0.1.13-0.fc17.i686.rpm librcd.i686: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/librcd-0.1.13/NEWS 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. '/usr/share/doc/librcd-0.1.13/NEWS' is empty from upstream. This is my first RPM Fusion package; please, I need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
7
0 / 0

[Bug 2471] New: Review request: vo-amrwbenc - VisualOn Adaptive Multi Rate Wideband speech encoder

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2471 Bug #: 2471 Summary: Review request: vo-amrwbenc - VisualOn Adaptive Multi Rate Wideband speech encoder Classification: Unclassified 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)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Spec: http://jwrdegoede.danny.cz/vo-amrwbenc.spec SRPM: http://jwrdegoede.danny.cz/vo-amrwbenc-0.1.2-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Library of VisualOn implementation of Adaptive Multi Rate Wideband (AMR-WB) encoder. Why not Fedora: possibly patented codec rpmlint: vo-amrwbenc-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://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.

11 years, 5 months

1
3
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers April 2013