[Bug 220265] Many unowned directories in /usr/share/man
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Many unowned directories in /usr/share/man
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=220265
fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|rawhide |9
redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
QAContact| |extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
Version|9 |rawhide
------- Additional Comments From fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com 2008-05-13 22:30 EST -------
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA.
More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
------- Additional Comments From redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de 2008-07-27 10:49 EST -------
This still applies on Rawhide.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 443730] Mimedefang doesn't check for viruses upon installation
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Mimedefang doesn't check for viruses upon installation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443730
redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
Flag| |needinfo?(kernel(a)pkts.ca)
------- Additional Comments From redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de 2008-07-27 10:46 EST -------
Penelope, can you please have a look to comment #2 whether it solves your issue
or not?
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 274261] drivers/rtc/hctosys.c: unable to open rtc device (rtc0)
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: drivers/rtc/hctosys.c: unable to open rtc device (rtc0)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=274261
redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution| |RAWHIDE
Status Whiteboard| bzcl34nup |bzcl34nup
------- Additional Comments From redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de 2008-07-27 10:38 EST -------
Doesn't seem to show up with rawhide any longer.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 291291] yumex dies after partial update
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: yumex dies after partial update
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=291291
hcmeyer(a)gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |CLOSED
Fixed In Version| |fc9
Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE
------- Additional Comments From hcmeyer(a)gmail.com 2008-07-27 08:15 EST -------
Sorry about delay, this bug no longer exists. Kill it, please.
However I have a new one to file against fc10-rawhide.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 355861] interpreter_regex should include libexecdir
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: interpreter_regex should include libexecdir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=355861
fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|rawhide |9
------- Additional Comments From fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com 2008-05-13 23:46 EST -------
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA.
More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
------- Additional Comments From updates(a)fedoraproject.org 2008-07-27 03:51 EST -------
rpmlint-0.84-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 230856] autogen package is misconfigured
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: autogen package is misconfigured
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230856
------- Additional Comments From debarshi.ray(a)gmail.com 2008-07-27 02:47 EST -------
autogen has a runtime dependency on autogen-libopts, while autogen-libopts-devel
has a similar dependency on autogen-libopts.
These are the files in the autogen:
%doc AUTHORS
%doc ChangeLog
%doc COPYING
%doc NEWS
%doc README
%doc THANKS
%doc TODO
%doc pkg/libopts/COPYING.gplv3
%{_bindir}/columns
%{_bindir}/getdefs
%{_bindir}/%{name}
%{_bindir}/xml2ag
%{_infodir}/%{name}.info.gz
%{_infodir}/%{name}.info-1.gz
%{_infodir}/%{name}.info-2.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/columns.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/getdefs.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/xml2ag.1.gz
%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}
%{_datadir}/%{name}/stdoptions.def
%{_datadir}/%{name}/*.tpl
These are the files in autogen-libopts:
%doc pkg/libopts/COPYING.mbsd
%doc pkg/libopts/COPYING.lgplv3
%{_libdir}/libguileopts.so.*
%{_libdir}/libopts.so.*
These are the files in the autogen-libopts-devel:
%{_bindir}/autoopts-config
%{_datadir}/aclocal/autoopts.m4
%{_datadir}/aclocal/liboptschk.m4
%{_libdir}/libguileopts.so
%{_libdir}/libopts.so
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/autoopts.pc
%{_mandir}/man1/autoopts-config.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%dir %{_includedir}/autoopts
%{_includedir}/autoopts/options.h
%{_includedir}/autoopts/usage-txt.h
Moreover autogen is tagged as GPLv3+. (Some files are licensed under GPLv2+.
Some files are licensed under GPLv2+.) autogen-libopts and autogen-libopts-devel
are tagged as LGPLv3+. (Although sources are dual licensed with BSD, some
autogen generated files are only under LGPLv3+. We drop BSD to avoid multiple
licensing scenario.)
So I guess the clients do not have to bother about the GPL virus, since the
libraries are separated out in LGPL-ed packages.
Package sources: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/rpms/autogen/devel/
Comments?
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months
[Bug 230856] autogen package is misconfigured
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: autogen package is misconfigured
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230856
------- Additional Comments From bkorb(a)gnu.org 2008-07-26 20:52 EST -------
No, actually Bruce was talking about the separation of "autogen" and
"autogen-devel". Without doing a careful analysis of which pieces went where,
the autogen collection of binaries requires the libopts shared library
("autogen-libopts"). Applications that use generated options (via the
"autogen-libopts-devel" template files and "autogen" executable), will also need
"autogen-libopts" to be installed. When such apps are installed, they would
_not_ need either "autogen" or "autogen-libopts-devel". Just and only the
shared library. The full build of such a product would require all three.
So, assuming that "autogen-libopts-devel" includes the option templates (e.g.
option.tpl), this file is useless without autogen. Thus,
"autogen-libopts-devel" really requires both "autogen" and "autogen-libopts".
What I chose to do for myself and my own releases was to say, "disk space is
cheap and it is not worth the bother to try to separate "libopts/autoopts" from
"autogen". I also do not see a problem with providing alternate licenses to
specific source files, all bundled into one package. I am not a lawyer, but 40
years of prior art seems to indicate that it is important to mark each and every
source file with a copyright notice line or two. That implies that each file
stands on its own. I do not want my autoopts using "clients" to fret over the
perceived "GPL virus".
I hope I'm being clear. :-)
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 9 months