Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757105
--- Comment #8 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> 2011-12-09 03:22:24 EST ---
Any chance to fix this issue for f15 and f16?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485566
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mwu(a)mail2.tercel.com.tw
--- Comment #20 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> 2011-12-09 00:44:04 EST ---
*** Bug 765675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: The printout font shades problem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=765675
Summary: The printout font shades problem
Product: Fedora
Version: 15
Platform: i386
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: unspecified
Priority: unspecified
Component: paps
AssignedTo: tagoh(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: mwu(a)mail2.tercel.com.tw
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: tagoh(a)redhat.com, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Created attachment 544347
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=544347
The paps output without font setting
Description of problem:
When we use "paps" to convert a text file with Traditional Chinese and
English fonts, the Traditional Chinese printout fonts will be lighter than the
English fonts. If we specify the font in the command, e.g. " paps
--font='DejaVu Sans Mono' test.txt > test.ps ", then the printout font shades
will look like the same for both the Traditional Chinese and the English fonts.
Because we don't see the problem in Fedora Core 6, please check to see if we
can use "paps" to convert the text directly without specifying the fonts
extraly. Thank you for your assistance.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
How reproducible:
Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. excute the command " paps test.txt > test.ps "
2.
3.
Actual results:
The Traditional Chinese printout font is lighter than the English printout
font.
Expected results:
The printout font shades is the same for both the Traditional Chinese font and
the English font.
Additional info:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: [abrt] imsettings-1.2.6-1.fc16: tuple_info_free: Process /usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=761547
Summary: [abrt] imsettings-1.2.6-1.fc16: tuple_info_free:
Process /usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon was killed by
signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
Product: Fedora
Version: 16
Platform: i686
OS/Version: Unspecified
Status: NEW
Status Whiteboard: abrt_hash:4340a2f4ea3ac4baf67151ea8f82f37f5a632fbb
Severity: unspecified
Priority: unspecified
Component: imsettings
AssignedTo: tagoh(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: mark(a)mperri.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: tagoh(a)redhat.com, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
libreport version: 2.0.7
abrt_version: 2.0.6
backtrace_rating: 4
cmdline: /usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon
crash_function: tuple_info_free
executable: /usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon
kernel: 3.1.2-1.fc16.i686.PAE
pid: 1420
pwd: /
reason: Process /usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon was killed by signal 11
(SIGSEGV)
time: Tue 06 Dec 2011 12:41:19 PM EST
uid: 1000
username: mark
var_log_messages: Dec 6 12:41:19 mach9 abrt[1452]: Saved core dump of pid 1420
(/usr/libexec/imsettings-daemon) to
/var/spool/abrt/ccpp-2011-12-06-12:41:19-1420 (17969152 bytes)
backtrace: Text file, 16391 bytes
dso_list: Text file, 2854 bytes
maps: Text file, 8771 bytes
smolt_data: Text file, 3162 bytes
build_ids:
:1df53725e371c75ee897f32d82ec0497ecbb8599
:bdbcb7ad0ae16806e9002af3c6d1ec65353108a0
:96b666a7f6d7a80ea6f9aef54f0cdd0f6190c058
:641296f1c3020865058939e8629a44acffcc3339
:92b99890f5d3dd6816e1a8125e9de9ac08931ac7
:11e752a8e19a41ab95fc6d418fcc0a706fefcf27
:5b853064c3d832d471e71bb67b714a7f69ff11d3
:647951954dab9eadcf521b97c5f9d7566b1e79c8
:42859023e4ec83a16446984b1e0c7510a38731c4
:987ead16c6bdc4d4e5a1b399addc8b320e4c0943
:d1bd2374eb12ee6116690a80ce23d695b3d585e8
:165f1b7a3f9e2a1335a761914de44dec316756e0
:36cc7c0490b1d29bbe496654fe01dea01f6c8615
:fb138a019cd93aa6212be49f31654f7bcb474640
:3b5d160bc67e95593211fd623fc34ee2ca23381a
:12da4d1dc9764d3990ab6a2def5a88c4687d4550
:40e3e5b910a2762887fba4cecdb950ad85cc7359
:85d6747093886eff44cf10e88d3eb9c88b6eb95d
:adca4c604227da51f7a095c00f343e39dda76d54
:89e4344d0155ae7f974883e883b459db6f35057b
:4c9f28567757d7141acd83c8b6c7d890e91f25e3
:4ad17dce13b95c3f6543c3ab56624e321dc1fce8
:6ad77e91d5cc02288d676787c163373f4fefe8fa
:8403f33f0be1a3653acd05b560f87aa1363d02d7
:4201959c334757bedda2a0e285f329c968b36a92
:c6cf75cd060ee3d95217e0f35145b626dae7b151
:d7cd016536dcce05ea28a1219c92eb9507121fa3
:0cc5c4bc97b347c85c28a24db9e236d4c727ed91
:d94f52f020f5a21d89ce70745a9bfb78cee38ba4
:5cd0f4c765c0e8ddbacdaf009616909639fbf804
:82674b49345364df4c158e8258b93fd4d8fdbae0
:1f19dd0ae78a24ebf6391fbacfb4fd9c38ad1b0b
:731e5089172d5c441eabc401de44017276eb27ac
:10cec21724c13b95ec03f00985b0405412817a49
environ:
:SHELL=/bin/bash
:DBUS_STARTER_ADDRESS=unix:abstract=/tmp/dbus-HuepcoZftz,guid=2b88e02586f0b555f0d1b64a00000044
:XDG_SESSION_COOKIE=612aa7cd2dc41876d184eff800000011-1323193278.634290-1158034358
:XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=/run/user/mark
:DISPLAY=:0
:DESKTOP_SESSION=gnome
:WINDOWPATH=1
:PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
:GDMSESSION=gnome
:XDG_VTNR=1
:USERNAME=mark
:XDG_SESSION_ID=2
:DBUS_SESSION_BUS_ADDRESS=unix:abstract=/tmp/dbus-HuepcoZftz,guid=2b88e02586f0b555f0d1b64a00000044
:XDG_SEAT=seat0
:XAUTHORITY=/var/run/gdm/auth-for-mark-oUMh3l/database
:USER=mark
:DBUS_STARTER_BUS_TYPE=session
:GNOME_KEYRING_PID=1342
:SHLVL=1
:PWD=/home/mark
:GNOME_KEYRING_CONTROL=/tmp/keyring-inpz6E
:LANG=en_US.UTF-8
:_=/usr/bin/dbus-launch
:LOGNAME=mark
:HOME=/home/mark
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734298
Jiri Moskovcak <jmoskovc(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760897
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-08 08:03:59 EST ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760897
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> 2011-12-08 01:54:41 EST ---
Thanks for the review. will fix the doc thing once the package is imported.
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libeasyfc
Short Description: Easy configuration generator interface for fontconfig
Owners: tagoh
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC: i18n-team
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760897
Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |panemade(a)gmail.com
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |panemade(a)gmail.com
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-08 00:01:45 EST ---
Review:
+ koji scratch build in f17
->http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3573455
+ rpmlint on rpms gave
libeasyfc.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fontconfig -> configuration
libeasyfc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
libeasyfc.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fontconfig -> configuration
libeasyfc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
libeasyfc-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
libeasyfc-gobject.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
libeasyfc-gobject-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
fontconfig -> configuration
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
+ source verified with upstream as
3e130155e357f26bb8112dad10ac1eca2d8ce608 libeasyfc-0.1.tar.bz2
3e130155e357f26bb8112dad10ac1eca2d8ce608 ../SOURCES/libeasyfc-0.1.tar.bz2
suggestions:
1) If not planning for RHEL then remove
a) buildroot
b) %clean section
c) cleaning of buildroot in %install
d) %defattr(-, root, root, -)
2) I think only base package should add docs files in %doc and not subpackages.
See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Lice…
APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760897
--- Comment #2 from Fabien Archambault <marbolangos(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-07 16:15:08 EST ---
Hi again,
I made the informal review using guidelines:
MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm
libeasyfc.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fontconfig -> configuration
libeasyfc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
libeasyfc.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fontconfig -> configuration
libeasyfc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-debuginfo-0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-devel-0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
libeasyfc-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-gobject-0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
libeasyfc-gobject.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fontconfig ->
configuration
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint libeasyfc-gobject-devel-0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm
libeasyfc-gobject-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
fontconfig -> configuration
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
-> OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
-> OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
-> OK
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
-> OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
-> OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
Checking against COPYING file
-> OK
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
-> OK
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
-> OK
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
-> OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
md5sum:
4f8b7096878ef6e955a31f5e6f622242 libeasyfc-0.1.tar.bz2
-> OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
-> OK
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
-> N/A
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
-> OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
-> N/A
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
-> OK
MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
-> OK
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
-> N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory.
-> OK
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
-> OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example.
-> OK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
-> OK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
-> OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
-> N/A
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
-> OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
-> OK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
-> OK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
-> OK
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
-> OK
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
-> OK
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need
a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
-> N/A
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
-> N/A
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
-> OK
SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
-> N/A
SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should
contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
-> N/A
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
INFO: Done(libeasyfc-0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm) Config(fedora-16-i386) 5 minutes 55
seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-i386/result
-> OK
SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested for i686 and x86_64 on F16
-> OK
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
-> Not tested
SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague,
and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
-> N/A
SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package
using a fully versioned dependency.
-> OK
SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and
this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg.
A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not
installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb.
-> N/A
SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
-> N/A
SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it
doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.
-> OK
Conclusion:
Except the package that I did not test I believe it fits the requires of the
Guidelines
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760897
Fabien Archambault <marbolangos(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marbolangos(a)gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Fabien Archambault <marbolangos(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-07 15:34:26 EST ---
Hi,
I am willing to do an informal review of your package but first, within the
Package Review Guidelines [1] you:
MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.