November 2018 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 2929] New: Review Request: smtube - A Youtube browser that can play and download Youtube videos

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2929 Bug #: 2929 Summary: Review Request: smtube - A Youtube browser that can play and download Youtube videos 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: cickumqt(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Spec URL: http://cicku.me/smtube.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/smtube-1.8-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: SMTube is a Youtube browser which allows to search, play and download Youtube videos. This project is based on some code from UMPlayer. Reason for not in Fedora: It needs smplayer. -- 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.

4 years, 5 months

1
7
0 / 0

Devtoolset available in rpmfusion el7 buildroot

by Nicolas Chauvet

Hi, With the current work to update ffmpeg to 3.x in el7 I expect that new application could be enabled on el7. Because some might requires an even newer compiler than the base one, please remind that the devtoolset scl is available. You can use a gcc 7 without much effort using that. (have a look at the chromium or vlc package for a sample). Thx for your notice -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

4 years, 7 months

2
3
0 / 0

[Bug 5079] New: Review request: wiringpi - PIN based GPIO access library for BCM283x SoC devices

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5079 Bug ID: 5079 Summary: Review request: wiringpi - PIN based GPIO access library for BCM283x SoC devices Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: arm OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: zonexpertconsulting(a)outlook.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: rpi Why not Fedora? --------------- This package is for the raspberry pi only which makes it too specific for the Fedora repos but ideally suited for the new RPM Fusion rpi namespace SPECFILE --------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/knight-of-ni/specfiles/master/wiringpi.... SOURCE RPM ---------- http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/4424/274424/wiringpi-2.46-... Description ------------- WiringPi is a PIN based GPIO access library for the BCM2835, BCM2836 and BCM2837 SoC devices (Raspberry Pi devices). It is usable from C, C++ and RTB (BASIC) as well as many other languages with suitable wrappers. NOTES ----- This is a modification of the wiringpi specfile from FedBerry, authored by Vaughan Agrez. upstream scm is using git, not github. Tarball is checked out via commit but represents release 2.46. %install is using the custom target "install-fedora" so not using %make_install macro At one point FedBerry called this package "wiringpi-libs", then transitioned to just "wiringpi". Obsoletes and Conflicts statements were added to prevent issues. I left these statements in the specfile. Let me know if you don't think this is necessary. RPMLINT -------- $ rpmlint /home/abauer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/wiringpi-2.46-4.fc28.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/abauer/rpmbuild/RPMS/armv7hl/wiringpi*.rpm 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

4 years, 7 months

1
22
0 / 0

[Bug 4041] New: Review request: mendeleydesktop - rpm of Mendeley

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4041 Bug #: 4041 Summary: Review request: mendeleydesktop - rpm of Mendeley 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: mark.harfouche(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org This is a repackaged version of what is available on the Mendeley website and attempts to make use of system libraries instead of the ones packaged with Mendeley. srpm: http://markharfouche.com/~makerpm/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.src.rpm Source rpmlint: $ rpmlint /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.src.rpm mendeleydesktop.src: W: invalid-license Proprietary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Binary rpmlint: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-23-x86_64/result/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: invalid-license Proprietary mendeleydesktop.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libPDFNetC.so libPDFNetC.so mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libPDFNetC.so exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libMendeley.so.1.16.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mendeleydesktop 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Justification for errors: W: invalid-license: Proprietary license is why I need RPMFusion E: invalid-soname can't change that. The source is a binary. W: shared-lib-calls-exit: I don't know what this means. I don't think I can change it W: no-manual-page-for-binary: I don't think this is necessary. Also, this was a binary software. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-23-x86_64/result/mendeleydesktop-devel-1.16.1-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Proprietary mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib <- I don't know what this means W: no-documentation <- this is a devel package My first RPMFusion package. I am seeking 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.

4 years, 10 months

1
58
0 / 0

[Bug 4750] New: Review request: deepin-music - Deepin Music Player

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4750 Bug ID: 4750 Summary: Review request: deepin-music - Deepin Music Player Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: sztsian(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org, sensor.wen(a)gmail.com Blocks: 2 namespace: free Spec URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-music.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-music-3.1.7.2-2.f... Description: Deepin Music Player Fedora Account System Username: zsun RPMFusion FAS Username: zsun * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: This depends on some codec that are not accepted in Fedora. * This is my second RPM Fusion package. (The other is bug 4749 which is also just filed) * I am a current Fedora Packager * RPMlint: $ rpmlint *.rpm deepin-music.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found zh_CN deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tweakful -> tweak deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gstreamer -> streamer, g streamer, steamer deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quanpin -> piquant deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tweakful -> tweak deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gstreamer -> streamer, g streamer, steamer deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quanpin -> piquant For these above, they are from upstream and I believe they are expected. deepin-music.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.deepin.dde.music.service Upstream provided an empty file. https://github.com/linuxdeepin/deepin-music/blob/master/music-player/data... deepin-music.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deepin-music deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "Next Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "PlayPause Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "Previous Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" For desktop file related. This music player is originally part of Deepin Desktop Environment(Short as DDE), and above are written under DDE's way. So I believe I shouldn't modify them. deepin-music-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id) For debuginfo(build-id), all packages built in rawhide contains this, so I assume this won't hurt. deepin-music-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation deepin-music-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib deepin-music-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 10 warnings. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 [Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

5 years

1
14
0 / 0

[Bug 3576] New: Review request: obs-studio - Open Broadcaster Software Studio

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3576 Bug #: 3576 Summary: Review request: obs-studio - Open Broadcaster Software Studio 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: fedorauser(a)fedoraproject.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2, 30 https://fedorauser.fedorapeople.org/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.src.rpm https://fedorauser.fedorapeople.org/obs-studio.spec Open Broadcaster Software is free and open source software for video recording and live streaming. OBS is not in Fedora because it depends on ffmpeg and other non free software. I need to be sponsored as this is my first package and I'm not sponsored in Fedora. OBS studio has some issues with placing files in correct location, there was a discussion about this (https://github.com/jp9000/obs-studio/pull/391). I think that all of these errors are related to this. rpmlint outputs: $ rpmlint SRPMS/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.src.rpm obs-studio.src:33: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib/libobs*.so* obs-studio.src:54: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/cmake/LibObs obs-studio.src:62: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/obs-plugins 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm obs-studio.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libobs.so.0 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobsglad.so obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobs.so obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobs-opengl.so obs-studio.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/obs-studio/COPYING obs-studio.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary obs 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-devel-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm obs-studio-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-debuginfo-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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.

5 years, 1 month

1
51
0 / 0

[Bug 5064] New: Review Request: unifi-lts - Ubiquiti UniFi controller LTS

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5064 Bug ID: 5064 Summary: Review Request: unifi-lts - Ubiquiti UniFi controller LTS Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: All OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: hobbes1069(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: nonfree SPEC: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0hdgvb6k3bqy2w7/unifi-lts.spec SRPM: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zkb4hpjbiuvf8x3/unifi-lts-5.6.40-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Ubiquiti UniFi server is a centralized management system for UniFi suite of devices. After the UniFi server is installed, the UniFi controller can be accessed on any web browser. The UniFi controller allows the operator to instantly provision thousands of UniFi devices, map out network topology, quickly manage system traffic, and further provision individual UniFi devices. This is the Long Term Support (LTS) package which also supports Gen 1 APs. --- This cannot go into Fedora or RPM Fusion Free due to proprietary license. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

5 years, 1 month

1
10
0 / 0

RPM Fusion mediacenter Spin

by Nicolas Chauvet

I had this project to try to build a dedicated Spin targeting media center Finally got something basically testable with an iso generated within koji for x86_64/ The idea is to be able to deploy a Kodi setup using RPM Fusion packages. (it could be based on another mediacenter solution if relevant). The current produced media is considered alpha state. Still lot of work to be done: - Setup a dedicated "product" to enable firewall, tuning and services options as appropriate - Enable initial setup tool - Have a mean to fetch dvb firmware files and others. - cockpit is bundled for remote administration - Better rely on comps group to install packages. - Have a dedicated page on the wiki. - Have an ostree version. Github with the kickstart: https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra/rpmfusion-kickstarts PS: please don't share the link widely yet http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=210378 Anyone interested in helping this project ? -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

5 years, 3 months

6
11
0 / 0

[Bug 4762] New: Review request: deepin-screen-recorder - Deepin Screen Recorder

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4762 Bug ID: 4762 Summary: Review request: deepin-screen-recorder - Deepin Screen Recorder Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: sztsian(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org, sensor.wen(a)gmail.com Blocks: 2, 4761 namespace: free SPEC URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-screen-recorder.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-screen-recorder-2... Description: Deepin Screen Recorder RPMFusion FAS Username: zsun * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: This depends on ffmpeg, which is not accepted in Fedora. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 [Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4761 [Bug 4761] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

5 years, 3 months

1
10
0 / 0

[Bug 4760] New: Review request: deepin-voice-recorder - Deepin Voice Recorder

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4760 Bug ID: 4760 Summary: Review request: deepin-voice-recorder - Deepin Voice Recorder Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: sztsian(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: free SPEC URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-voice-recorder.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-voice-recorder-1.... Description: Deepin Voice Recorder RPMFusion FAS Username: zsun * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: This depends on some codec, which are not accepted in Fedora. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/en_US/icon/Enter.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/en_US/icon/Enter.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/en_US/icon/close_icon.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/en_US/icon/close_icon.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/Enter.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/Enter.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/close_icon.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/close_icon.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/tips.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/dman/deepin-voice-recorder/zh_CN/icon/tips.svg deepin-voice-recorder.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deepin-voice-recorder deepin-voice-recorder-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation I believe I don't need to fix problems in svg files. So almost all the above message should be harmless. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

5 years, 3 months

1
18
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers November 2018