Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226367
Summary: Merge Review: reiserfs-utils Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nobody@fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com CC: jgarzik@redhat.com
Fedora Merge Review: reiserfs-utils
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/reiserfs-utils/ Initial Owner: jgarzik@redhat.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: reiserfs-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226367
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
mgarski@post.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mgarski@post.pl
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=226367
Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |limb@jcomserv.net AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |limb@jcomserv.net
--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2008-09-16 13:05:18 EDT --- rpmlint on SRPM and RPMS are clean.
Upstream Source is 404 due to namesys.com DNS issues, but md5sum matches kernel.org version, which I think is Good Enough under the circumstances.
Any reason it's called reiserfs-utils and not the upstream reiserfsprogs? I assume some sort of fs-util nameing convention? If so, document in spec.
Otherwise, full review is great, very tidy package, no other blockers.
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=226367
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2008-12-10 09:10:34 EDT --- Ping?
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=226367
--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2009-03-31 11:27:40 EDT --- Ping again?
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=226367
Jeff Garzik jgarzik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Jeff Garzik jgarzik@redhat.com 2009-03-31 16:19:40 EDT --- Somebody needs to poke Fedora Project about this package, as I have not cared about it in a long, long time.
Feel free to offer to maintain this Fedora package, if you wish!
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=226367
--- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2009-03-31 17:52:46 EDT --- If you don't want to maintain it, why don't you orphan it? The only reason it persists in the distro is because you're still listed as the owner.
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=226367
--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2009-03-31 18:04:25 EDT --- Actually, I think I'll just save you the trouble. Sorry for the pkgdb spam you'll receive. Maybe someone who wants this package will pick it up.
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=226367
--- Comment #7 from Jeff Garzik jgarzik@redhat.com 2009-03-31 18:10:26 EDT --- Thanks!
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=226367
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |itamar@ispbrasil.com.br
--- Comment #8 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-03-31 21:42:45 EDT --- please tell me what's need's to be fixed.
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=226367
Xose Vazquez Perez xose.vazquez@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |xose.vazquez@gmail.com
--- Comment #9 from Xose Vazquez Perez xose.vazquez@gmail.com 2009-04-01 07:50:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8)
please tell me what's need's to be fixed.
Latest release is 3.6.21:
This is first stable release since 2004-10-13, and it contains changes made by Jeff Mahoney (everything got testing as a part of latest SuSE distros).
2009-01-09 Patches from Jeff Mahoney: - reiserfsprogs-mkreiserfs-quiet.diff - reiserfsprogs-large-block-warning.diff - reiserfsprogs-fsck-mapid.diff - reiserfsprogs-external-journal-changes.diff - reiserfsprogs-remove-stupid-fsck_sleep.diff - reiserfsprogs-mkfs-use-o_excl.diff - reiserfsprogs-enforce-block-limit.diff - reiserfsprogs-large-fs.diff - reiserfsprogs-better-fsck-a-behavior.diff - reiserfsprogs-remove-dependency-on-asm_unaligned.h.diff - reiserfsprogs-progress.diff - reiserfsprogs-reorder-libs.diff
Patches from Ludwig Nussel: - mkreiserfs-set-the-owner-of-the-root-directory-to-the-calling-user.diff
Patches from Edward Shishkin: - reiserfsprogs-disable-small-block.diff - reiserfsprogs-new-version.diff
The URL tag in the .spec file should be changed to the new $HOME at: http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/fs/reiserfs/
-thanks-
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=226367
--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2009-04-01 08:46:18 EDT --- Itamar, basically correct the URL tag. I'd have liked to have had some explanation of the naming being different than upstream (reiserfs-utils/reiserfsprogs), but that would have come from Jeff, ideally, so I'll let that go.
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=226367
--- Comment #11 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-04-01 10:09:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10)
Itamar, basically correct the URL tag. I'd have liked to have had some explanation of the naming being different than upstream (reiserfs-utils/reiserfsprogs), but that would have come from Jeff, ideally, so I'll let that go.
the future of reiserfs is still obscure [1], about the name , I recommend to let the current name, this package will probably removed in next merge review
[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiser4
http://ispbrasil.com.br/reiserfs-utils/reiserfs-utils.spec http://ispbrasil.com.br/reiserfs-utils/reiserfs-utils-3.6.21-1.fc11.src.rpm
koji scratch build dist-f11
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1270246
Can I go ahead and commit to cvs ?
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=226367
Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |ERRATA Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2009-04-01 10:45:18 EDT --- Looks great. APPROVED. Commit and build.
Thanks for finishing this, and taking over the package.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org