[Bug 3900] New: Review Request: tivolibre - Java app and library for decoding TiVo files to standard MPEG files
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3900
Bug #: 3900
Summary: Review Request: tivolibre - Java app and library for
decoding TiVo files to standard MPEG files
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: orion(a)cora.nwra.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Java app and library for decoding TiVo files to standard MPEG files.
Spec file: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/rpmfusion/tivolibre.spec
SRPM file:
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/rpmfusion/tivolibre-0.7.2-1.fc23.src.rpm
This contains an implementation of the Qualcomm Touring family of encryption
algorithms and has the following restriction:
# 5. The Turing family of encryption algorithms are covered by patents in
# the United States of America and other countries. A free and
# irrevocable license is hereby granted for the use of such patents to
# the extent required to utilize the Turing family of encryption
# algorithms for any purpose, subject to the condition that any
# commercial product utilising any of the Turing family of encryption
# algorithms should show the words "Encryption by QUALCOMM" either on the
# product or in the associated documentation.
and hence should be considered nonfree.
--
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
[Bug 4105] New: Review request: sdcc-nonfree - Small Device C Compiler - nonfree files
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4105
Bug #: 4105
Summary: Review request: sdcc-nonfree - Small Device C Compiler
- nonfree files
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: rrankin(a)ihug.com.au
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
Spec URL:
https://github.com/rrankin/sdcc-nonfree/blob/master/sdcc-nonfree.spec
Source URL:
https://github.com/rrankin/sdcc-nonfree/blob/master/sdcc-nonfree-3.6.0-1....
Description:
Files derived from Microchip files which are licensed for
use for Microchip devices only. Files used for compiling code for
14 and 16 bit PIC processors. The sdcc --use-non-free flag must
be used to access these files during compilation and linking.
License:
Restricting use for Microchip devices only makes license on the files
in this package non-free from a Fedora perspective.
Rpmlint:
rpmlint sdcc-nonfree.spec
sdcc-nonfree.spec:51: W: configure-without-libdir-spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
note: %configure is not used as files end up in wrong directory
$ rpmlint sdcc-nonfree-3.6.0-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: W: invalid-license Redistributable but use for Microchip
devices only
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share
/usr/share/sdcc/non-free/lib/pic16/libdev18f66j60.lib
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: W: binaryinfo-readelf-failed
/usr/share/sdcc/non-free/lib/pic16/libdev18f66j60.lib readelf: Error:
/tmp/rpmlint.sdcc-nonfree-3.6.0-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm.fjysaswk/usr/share/sdcc/non-free/lib/pic16/libdev18f66j60.lib:
did not find a valid archive header
... Repeated for each .lib file in package
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: W: no-documentation
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/share/sdcc/non-free/include/pic14/pic16lf1829.h
... Repeats for each .h file in package
sdcc-nonfree.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/share/sdcc/non-free/include/pic16/pic18lf4580.h
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 724 errors, 1452 warnings.
Notes:
1 W: invalid-license - Licence not suitable for Fedora
2 E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share - The .lib files are not lib files
to be run on the host machine but rather to be included in the
generated PIC code. The .libs files may be arch dependant only
do to the endian of the host machine.
/usr/share is where sdcc expects to find them.
3 W: binaryinfo-readelf-failed - The .lib files are not elf files.
4 W: no-documentation - All documentation is in sdcc package
5 W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package - The .h files are required for
sdcc operation on PIC code and thus should not be in a -devel
package
$ rpmlint sdcc-nonfree-devel-3.6.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm
sdcc-nonfree-devel.noarch: W: invalid-license Redistributable but use for
Microchip devices only
sdcc-nonfree-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Notes:
1 Invalid license is keeping these files out of Fedora
2 Contains source files which are own documentation
This is my first rpmfusion package I am a sponsored Fedora packager.
--
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
[Bug 4700] New: Review request: bitwig-studio - A dynamic software
for creation and performance of musical ideas
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4700
Bug ID: 4700
Summary: Review request: bitwig-studio - A dynamic software for
creation and performance of musical ideas
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: cybolic(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2
namespace: nonfree
# Spec
https://github.com/Cybolic/rpmspec-bitwig-studio/blob/master/bitwig-studi...
# Description
Bitwig Studio is a dynamic software for creation and performance of your
musical ideas on stage or in the studio.
This is proprietary piece of software, requiring a purchased license to
function outside of demo mode.
# rpmlint on source package
> bitwig-studio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US workflow -> work flow, work-flow, workforce
"workflow" is how the text is written on bitwig.com.
> bitwig-studio.src: W: invalid-license EULA
From the RPM documentation, this would seem to be the valid option.
> bitwig-studio.src: W: no-%build-section
There's nothing to build, it's a repackaging.
# rpmlint on binary package
There is a lot of output from rpmlint on the binary, most of which is I don't
see a solution for since this is proprietary software.
This is my first RPM Fusion package. I'm coming from Arch and was saddened to
see that there was no easy way to install Bitwig on RPM systems.
I seem to be sponsored by basset on Fedora, but I'm new to this, so I might be
wrong.
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.
4 years
[Bug 4779] New: Review request: gjots2 - gjots2 is a fairly simple
jotter (outline processor) application for your desktop.
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4779
Bug ID: 4779
Summary: Review request: gjots2 - gjots2 is a fairly simple
jotter (outline processor) application for your
desktop.
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Hardware: x86_64
URL: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/
OS: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P1
Component: Review Request
Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Reporter: bob.hepple(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Blocks: 2, 30
namespace: free
Source rpm:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/files/gjots2/3.0.2/gjots2-3.0.2-1...
Spec file:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/files/gjots2/3.0.2/gjots2.spec/do...
Description:
gjots2 ("gee-jots" or, if you prefer, "gyachts"!) is a way to marshall
and organise your text notes in a convenient, hierarchical way. For
example, use it for all your notes on Unix, personal bits and pieces,
recipes and even PINs and passwords (encrypted with ccrypt(1), gpg(1)
or openssl(1)).
You can also use it to "mind-map" your compositions - write down all
your thoughts and then start to organise them into a tree. By
manipulating the tree you can easily reorder your thoughts and
structure them appropriately.
Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora? Version 2 is is
fedora for several years but I have been unable to get them to upgrade to
version 3 (numerous emails and bug reports). Version 2 is only applicable to
Centos-6 while Centos-7 requires version 3.
rpmlint messages are trivial (below)
THis is my first rpmfusion package
I am seeking a sponsor.
0 11:33 rpmbuild/ $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/gjots2-3.0.2-1.201801081627.noarch.rpm
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Organise -> Organist, Organism,
Organize
gjots2.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A note jotter. Organise your ideas,
notes, facts in a hierarchy.
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gyachts -> yachts, g
yachts
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US marshall -> Marshall,
marshal, marshals
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US organise -> organist,
organism, organize
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ccrypt -> crypt, c crypt
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpg -> pg, gig, gag
gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openssl -> slope
gjots2.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/docbook2gjots
gjots2.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gjots2 /usr/bin/env python
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2docbook
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2emacs
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2html
gjots2.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gjots2html.py /usr/bin/env
python
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2lpr
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2org
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/org2gjots
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/__init__.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/common.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/file.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/find.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/general.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/gui.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/prefs.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/printDialog.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/sortDialog.py
gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/version.py
gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/doc
gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/gjots2/COPYING
gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man
gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man/man1
gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2emacs
gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2html.py
gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2lpr
gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2org
gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary org2gjots
gjots2.noarch: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gjots2/INSTALL
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/de_DE/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/locale/en_US/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nb/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/no/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sl/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo
gjots2.noarch: E: invalid-appdata-file /usr/share/appdata/gjots2.appdata.xml
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 25 errors, 25 warnings.
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=30
[Bug 30] Tracker : Sponsorship Request
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
4 years
[Bug 4958] New: Review request: sch_cake-kmod - Kernel module (kmod)
for sch_cake
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4958
Bug ID: 4958
Summary: Review request: sch_cake-kmod - Kernel module (kmod)
for sch_cake
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: dagofthedofg(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
namespace: free
URLs:
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-kmod.spec
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake.spec
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-kmod-0-1.fc28.sr...
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description:
Kernel Module containing Cake queueing discipline(qdisc).
https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/CakeTechnical/
Justification:
Kernel modules are not allowed in the stock Fedora Repositories
rpmlint:
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-kmod-0-1.fc28.src.rpm
sch_cake-kmod.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line
6)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# Not sure what warning is, checked for spaces and didn't see any where
specified in spec file
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm
sch_cake.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood
sch_cake.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake
sch_cake.src:1: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 1)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
# Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods including crystalhd
# Again not sure what spacing warning is, spec file looks clean
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/akmod-sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
akmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# No documentation provided upstream, usage info contained in source files
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/kmod-sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
kmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Metapackage -> Meta
package, Meta-package, Prepackage
kmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
# kmodtool generates Summary, no way to tweak it without it being fixed
upstream
# No documentation provided upstream
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood
sch_cake.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake
sch_cake.x86_64: E: no-binary
sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
# Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods
# userland package, no binaries included
# No documentation provided upstream
Notes:
This is my first RPMFusion package submission
I am seeking a sponsor
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
4 years
[Bug 4960] New: Review request: sch_cake - Kernel module (kmod) for
sch_cake
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4960
Bug ID: 4960
Summary: Review request: sch_cake - Kernel module (kmod) for
sch_cake
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: dagofthedofg(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
namespace: free
URLs:
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake.spec
https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description:
sch_cake common files.
https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/CakeTechnical/
Justification:
Kernel modules are not allowed in the stock Fedora Repositories
rpmlint:
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm
sch_cake.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood
sch_cake.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake
sch_cake.src:1: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 1)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
# Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods including crystalhd
# Not sure what spacing warning is, spec file looks clean
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood
sch_cake.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake
sch_cake.x86_64: E: no-binary
sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
# Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods
# userland package, no binaries included
# No documentation provided upstream
Notes:
This is my first RPMFusion package submission
I am seeking a sponsor
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
4 years
[Bug 5074] New: Review request: raspberrypi-vc - VideoCore GPU
libraries, utilities and demos for Raspberry Pi
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5074
Bug ID: 5074
Summary: Review request: raspberrypi-vc - VideoCore GPU
libraries, utilities and demos for Raspberry Pi
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?
---------------
As far as I understand it, this package is too specific (rpi only) to be
eligible for inclusion into the Fedora repos. I can of course research this
more thoroughly if needed.
FAS account name: kni
SPECFILE
---------
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/knight-of-ni/specfiles/master/raspberry...
SOURCE RPM
----------
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/3940/273940/raspberrypi-vc...
Description
-------------
Libraries, utilities and demos for the Raspberry Pi BCM283x SOC GPUs
Essentially, this library will be a needed dependency for any package in the
rpi namespace that accesses the PI's GPU. e.g. omxplayer
NOTES
-----
Credit goes to Vaughan Agrez with the FedBerry project for doing the majority
of the work with this specfile. I have modified it to better fit RPMFusion
packing standards and have removed requirements specific to FedBerry.
This package represents a snapshot from an upstream project that does not have
any releases. Hence, the unusual package name.
This package places the following symlink for compatibility:
/opt/vc -> %{_libdir}/vc
I can see why this has been created, but I'm still on the fence on this one. I
have not tested whether this is truly needed and can look into this further, if
someone thinks we should leave /opt alone.
This will be the first of multiple package requests for the rpi namespace, and
I'm looking forward to receiving feedback for this package request.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
4 years