Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 208250 - Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers
Summary: Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PI...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mamoru TASAKA
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-09-27 12:32 UTC by Alain Portal
Modified: 2010-02-09 00:32 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-09-29 17:53:49 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
kevin: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
mockbuild log of piklab-0.11.3-2 (deleted)
2006-09-28 17:57 UTC, Mamoru TASAKA
no flags Details

Description Alain Portal 2006-09-27 12:32:24 UTC
Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/piklab.spec
SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/piklab-0.11.3-1.src.rpm
Description: Piklab is a graphic development environment for PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers. It interfaces with various toochains for compiling and assembling and it supports several Microchip and direct programmers.

Comment 1 Jochen Schmitt 2006-09-27 18:54:18 UTC
Good:
+ Local build works fine.
+ Local install/uninstall works fine.
+ Program starts without complains.
+ Tar ball in source package matches with upstream.
+ Mock build works fine.

Bad:

- Rpmlint of source package complaints:
pmlint piklab-0.11.3-1.src.rpm
E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC
and dsPIC microcontrollers
E: piklab unknown-key GPG#8d4d7450
W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.desktop.typo-fr.patch 0600
W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.x-desktop-fr.patch 0600
W: piklab strange-permission piklab.spec 0600
W: piklab mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 51, tab: line 3)

- rpmlint complains on binary rpm:
E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC
and dsPIC microcontrollers
W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
../doc/common
/tmp/piklab-0.11.3-1.i686.rpm.18087/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop:
warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use
within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"

- Please use http://switch.dl.sourceforge.net/..., so spectool will work 
properly.

- Qt environment variable was not sourced.

- Duplicate BuildRequires: libart_lgpl-devel (by kdelibs-devel), fam-devel (by
kdelibs-devel)

- BuildRequires: gettext is missing (required to build the translations)
 
- Rpmlint complains on installed package:
E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC
and dsPIC microcontrollers
W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
../doc/common
//usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop: warning: file contains key
"DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use within KDE, and should in the
future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"






Comment 2 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 11:46:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Bad:
> 
> - Rpmlint of source package complaints:
> pmlint piklab-0.11.3-1.src.rpm
> E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on 
PIC
> and dsPIC microcontrollers

I don't have this error with an uptodate rpmlint (0.78-1.fc5)

> E: piklab unknown-key GPG#8d4d7450

This is my key, please import.

> W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.desktop.typo-fr.patch 0600
> W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.x-desktop-fr.patch 0600
> W: piklab strange-permission piklab.spec 0600

OK.

> W: piklab mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 51, tab: line 3)

It seems to me to not be really important.

> - rpmlint complains on binary rpm:
> E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on 
PIC
> and dsPIC microcontrollers

ideem above

> W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
> ../doc/common

I tried to get help about this warning, no real answer
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00789.html

> /tmp/piklab-0.11.3-1.i686.rpm.18087/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop:
> warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use
> within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"

This is a KDE application.

> - Please use http://switch.dl.sourceforge.net/..., so spectool will work 
> properly.

prdownloads.sourceforge.net don't do the same?
what spectool?

> - Qt environment variable was not sourced.

Why sourcing Qt environment variables?

> - Duplicate BuildRequires: libart_lgpl-devel (by kdelibs-devel), fam-devel 
(by
> kdelibs-devel)

OK.

> - BuildRequires: gettext is missing (required to build the translations)

There is no translation in this package

> - Rpmlint complains on installed package:
> E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on 
PIC
> and dsPIC microcontrollers
> W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
> ../doc/common
> //usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop: warning: file contains key
> "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use within KDE, and should in 
the
> future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"

Idem above


Comment 3 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 13:25:36 UTC
Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/piklab.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/piklab-0.11.3-2.src.rpm

%changelog
* Thu Sep 28 2006  Alain Portal <aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr> 0.11.3-2
  - Remove duplicate BR
  - Fix files permissions
  - Improve download URL
  - Don't mis space and tab


Comment 4 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-28 17:57:38 UTC
Created attachment 137327 [details]
mockbuild log of piklab-0.11.3-2

Alain, can you rebuild piklab-0.11.3-2 correctly?
I tried under FC6-devel i386 mock, but it failed.

Would you check my build log?

Comment 5 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 18:20:22 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Created an attachment (id=137327) [edit]
> mockbuild log of piklab-0.11.3-2
> 
> Alain, can you rebuild piklab-0.11.3-2 correctly?

I'll do that tomorrow at work, my home computer isn't powerfull

> I tried under FC6-devel i386 mock, but it failed.

Strange, build fine on an uptodate FC5

> Would you check my build log?

Yes, please.

Comment 6 Jochen Schmitt 2006-09-28 18:37:48 UTC
Bad:

- Don't sourced QT environment variables.
  (this should make sure, that the build runs agains the right Qt version)
- Rpmlint complaints on binary rpm:
E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC
and dsPIC microcontrollers
W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
../doc/common
/tmp/piklab-0.11.3-2.i686.rpm.5998/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop:
warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use
within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"


BTW: I use rpmlint-0.78-1

Comment 7 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 19:00:54 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Bad:
> 
> - Don't sourced QT environment variables.
>   (this should make sure, that the build runs agains the right Qt version)

This isn't needed.

> - Rpmlint complaints on binary rpm:
> E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on 
PIC
> and dsPIC microcontrollers

I don't have this error!
Mamoru, please, could you confirm?

> W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
> ../doc/common
> /tmp/piklab-0.11.3-2.i686.rpm.5998/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop:
> warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use
> within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"

Why do you want I make a better package than you?

rpmlint kyum-0.7.5-4.fc6.i386.rpm
W: kyum 
dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kyum/common /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common
W: kyum 
symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kyum/common /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common
E: kyum non-executable-script /usr/share/apps/kyum/kyum_sysinfo.py 0644
E: kyum zero-length /usr/share/doc/kyum-0.7.5/README
/tmp/kyum-0.7.5-4.fc6.i386.rpm.3618/usr/share/applications/kde/fedora-kyum.desktop: 
warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use 
within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"




Comment 8 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-28 19:11:36 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Bad:
> > 
> > - Don't sourced QT environment variables.
> >   (this should make sure, that the build runs agains the right Qt version)
> 
> This isn't needed.
I also think this is not needed because the files under /etc/profile.d
is "source"d even without explicitly sourced. Actually many packages
using Qt don't source Qt environ explicitly, this can be seen under:

http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/
 
> > - Rpmlint complaints on binary rpm:
> > E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on 
> PIC
> > and dsPIC microcontrollers
> 
> I don't have this error!
> Mamoru, please, could you confirm?

I HAVE. "rpmlint -I summary-too-long" says summary must be less than
80 characters (not longer than 79), however, this summary seems to
have just 80 characters......
> 
> > W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common
> > ../doc/common

This warning is not a problem because kdelibs is installed together
and it corrects this.

> > /tmp/piklab-0.11.3-2.i686.rpm.5998/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop:
> > warning: file contains key "DocPath", this key is currently reserved for use
> > within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by "X-"
> 
> Why do you want I make a better package than you?

I think this can be ignored.


Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-28 19:14:48 UTC
And....

(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Created an attachment (id=137327) [edit] [edit]
> > mockbuild log of piklab-0.11.3-2
> > 
> > Alain, can you rebuild piklab-0.11.3-2 correctly?
> 
> I'll do that tomorrow at work, my home computer isn't powerfull
> 
> > I tried under FC6-devel i386 mock, but it failed.
> 
> Strange, build fine on an uptodate FC5

I checked under FC5 i386_smp mockbuild and it surely succeeded,
strange.



Comment 10 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 20:17:33 UTC
In your attachement, I found:
checking readline/readline.h usability... yes
checking readline/readline.h presence... yes
checking for readline/readline.h... yes
checking for rl_initialize... configure: WARNING: libreadline not found

Perhaps it is a problem between versions
FC5 : readline-5.0
FC6 : readline-5.1


Comment 11 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 20:31:26 UTC
Under FC5:
checking readline/readline.h usability... yes
checking readline/readline.h presence... yes
checking for readline/readline.h... yes
checking for rl_initialize... yes


Comment 12 Alain Portal 2006-09-28 22:39:57 UTC
Upstream report me a possible problem, libncurses seems not be detected
your log:
checking for main in -lcurses... no
checking for main in -lncurses... no
checking readline/readline.h usability... yes

FC5:
hecking for main in -lcurses... yes
checking readline/readline.h usability... yes
checking readline/readline.h presence... yes


Comment 13 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 04:57:08 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> Upstream report me a possible problem, libncurses seems not be detected
> your log:
> checking for main in -lcurses... no
> checking for main in -lncurses... no
> checking readline/readline.h usability... yes
> 
> FC5:
> hecking for main in -lcurses... yes
> checking readline/readline.h usability... yes
> checking readline/readline.h presence... yes
> 

Good catch, thanks. Actually, adding "ncurses-devel" for BR
seems to work for FC6-devel i386 mockbuild.

From changelog of ncurses rpm:

* Sat Jul 08 2006 Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar> 5.5-20
- update to patch 20060701
- don't strip libraries, chmod +x them
- move .so links to devel package
- add gpm-devel to buildrequires
- spec cleanup



Comment 14 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 07:23:11 UTC
The problem is to know if I have to add this BR or if this BR is missing in a 
package from which pikloop depends.

Comment 15 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 07:25:15 UTC
(In reply to comment #14)
> The problem is to know if I have to add this BR or if this BR is missing in 
a 
> package from which pikloop depends.

piklab of course :-)

Comment 16 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 08:16:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > The problem is to know if I have to add this BR or if this BR is missing in 
> a 
> > package from which pikloop depends.
> 
> piklab of course :-)

Well, configure requests the existence of -lcurses.
in FC5, this is in ncurses, which are installed by minimal buildroot.
However, in FC6, libcurses.so is moved to ncurses-devel.

So you have to add ncurses-devel to BuildRequires and the problem
for rebuilding is resolved.

I have not yet reviewed this fully, however,
* rpmlint complaints about long summary. It says that summary should
  have no longer than 79 characters.
* Please add "ncurses-devel" to BuildRequiers (this should be no problem
  for FC5, too).
* Perhaps /etc/security/consoles.perms.d/ should be
  /etc/security/console.perms.d/ ? (the latter is owned by pam)

Comment 17 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 08:42:13 UTC
(In reply to comment #16)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > (In reply to comment #14)
> > > The problem is to know if I have to add this BR or if this BR is missing 
in 
> > a 
> > > package from which pikloop depends.
> > 
> > piklab of course :-)
> 
> Well, configure requests the existence of -lcurses.
> in FC5, this is in ncurses, which are installed by minimal buildroot.
> However, in FC6, libcurses.so is moved to ncurses-devel.
> 
> So you have to add ncurses-devel to BuildRequires and the problem
> for rebuilding is resolved.
> 
> I have not yet reviewed this fully, however,
> * rpmlint complaints about long summary. It says that summary should
>   have no longer than 79 characters.

I really don't understand, my rpmlint don't complaints!
I'll fix...

> * Please add "ncurses-devel" to BuildRequiers (this should be no problem
>   for FC5, too).

Before doing this change, I'm waiting one hour or two for an answer to my 
question on Extras list.

> * Perhaps /etc/security/consoles.perms.d/ should be
>   /etc/security/console.perms.d/ ? (the latter is owned by pam)

Oups, you're right, it's a typo.


Comment 18 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 09:03:25 UTC
Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/piklab.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/piklab-0.11.3-3.src.rpm

%changelog
* Wed Sep 29 2006  Alain Portal <aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr> 0.11.3-3
  - Add doc about how to complete full feature installation
  - Fix typo on security pathname
  - Short summary
  - Add BR ncurses-devel for FC6


Comment 19 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 10:57:45 UTC
Okay. Full review for piklab.

1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines

* Use rpmlint
W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink \
   /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common
   - Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem
     is that this symlink is broken.
     Perhaps this should point to ../common  .

2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
   = Nothing.

3. Other things I have noticed:
   - Well, 

/etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
/etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms

     These two files are same. Acutally spec file says:
%{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
   %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
%{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
   %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms

   I suspect only one of these two are necessary.
   Also, while this is not documented, the files under
   /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like
   <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).

Comment 20 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 11:20:33 UTC
(In reply to comment #19)
> Okay. Full review for piklab.
> 
> 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
> 
> * Use rpmlint
> W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink \
>    /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common
>    - Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem
>      is that this symlink is broken.
>      Perhaps this should point to ../common  .

No. KDE recently changed /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/common 
in /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common.

See 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00794.html 
and some follow up.


> 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
>    = Nothing.
> 
> 3. Other things I have noticed:
>    - Well, 
> 
> /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
> /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
> 
>      These two files are same. Acutally spec file says:
> %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
>    %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
> %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
>    %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
> 
>    I suspect only one of these two are necessary.

No, this is an error, the second should be %{SOURCE4}

>    Also, while this is not documented, the files under
>    /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like
>    <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).

I don't know how to choose a number.
This configuration is taken from http://piklab.sourceforge.net/support.php
section "for distributions using udev and PAM.



Comment 21 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 12:18:32 UTC
(In reply to comment #20)
> (In reply to comment #19)
> >    /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common
> >    - Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem
> >      is that this symlink is broken.
> >      Perhaps this should point to ../common  .
> 
> No. KDE recently changed /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/common 
> in /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common.

Well, then what package owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common
_NOW_ ? I use rawhide, and the newest rawhide kdelibs-3.5.4-6.fc6
owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common, however, my system doesn't have
/usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common directory.

So my opinition is:
* If some package actually owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common,
  this package should require the package (I am now trying to search
  for it by yum, however for some reason I don't know yum is very
  slow for now!!)
* If no package owns the directory _NOW_, 
   /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common should point to ../common
  as before till some package gets to own /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common.
  
> > 3. Other things I have noticed:
> >    - Well, 
> > 
> > /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
> > /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
> > 
> >      These two files are same. Acutally spec file says:
> > %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
> >    %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms
> > %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \
> >    %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
> > 
> No, this is an error, the second should be %{SOURCE4}

Okay. Just fix as it should be.

> 
> >    Also, while this is not documented, the files under
> >    /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like
> >    <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).
> 
> I don't know how to choose a number.
> This configuration is taken from http://piklab.sourceforge.net/support.php
> section "for distributions using udev and PAM.

This is not documented and you don't have to add the number if
you don't want to.


Comment 22 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 13:03:29 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)
> 
> Well, then what package owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common
> _NOW_ ? 

I finished searching for this by yum. The result is, no package
owns this (in rawhide).

Comment 23 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 13:04:56 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)

> > No. KDE recently changed /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/common 
> > in /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common.
> 
> Well, then what package owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common
> _NOW_ ? I use rawhide, and the newest rawhide kdelibs-3.5.4-6.fc6
> owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common, however, my system doesn't have
> /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common directory.

The /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common is owned by kde-i18n-$LANG.
You right, as english is the default language /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common is 
owned by kdelibs. But I thought that /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common was 
owned by kde-i18n-English, but this package don't exist ;-)
This is the exception.
So, for all languages but english, common is in $LANG/docs/, for english, it 
is in $LANG/

> So my opinition is:
> * If some package actually owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common,
>   this package should require the package (I am now trying to search
>   for it by yum, however for some reason I don't know yum is very
>   slow for now!!)
> * If no package owns the directory _NOW_, 
>    /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common should point to ../common
>   as before till some package gets to 
own /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/docs/common.
>   
> > >    Also, while this is not documented, the files under
> > >    /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like
> > >    <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).
> > 
> > I don't know how to choose a number.
> > This configuration is taken from http://piklab.sourceforge.net/support.php
> > section "for distributions using udev and PAM.
> 
> This is not documented and you don't have to add the number if
> you don't want to.

As I don't know choosing a number, I'll don't add. I'll see later when I'll 
get more informations.

Comment 24 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 14:16:33 UTC
Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/piklab.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/piklab-0.11.3-4.src.rpm

%changelog
* Wed Sep 29 2006  Alain Portal <aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr> 0.11.3-4
  - Fix typo for installing pickit2.perms
  - Add Application category in desktop file
  - Fix symlink: english is the only language where common directory is in
  LANG directory while for other, common is in LANG/docs directory


Comment 25 Mamoru TASAKA 2006-09-29 16:20:56 UTC
Well, /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms says:
-------------------------------------------------------------
<pickit2>=/dev/pickit2*
<console> 0600 <pickit2> 0600 roo
-------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps the last word must be "root". Just fix it.


------------------------------------------------------------------
  This package (piklab) is APPROVED by me.

Comment 26 Alain Portal 2006-09-29 16:28:23 UTC
OK, really thanks for the review!

%changelog
* Fri Sep 29 2006  Alain Portal <aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr> 0.11.3-5
  - Fix typo in pickit2.perms


Comment 27 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-04-10 16:14:09 UTC
Chitlesh, if you want to take over the maintainship
and when Alain agrees, take a procedure according to

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure

Comment 28 Chitlesh GOORAH 2007-04-10 21:40:52 UTC
Alain, could I take over ?

Comment 29 Alain Portal 2007-04-11 12:14:31 UTC
What have I to do?
I can't access to the link 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure
I get a 502 error

Comment 30 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-04-11 12:34:23 UTC
I can see the URL correctly. Still can't you access, Alain?
If still you cannot, please answer the following questions.

* Would you want to be a co-maintainer?
* Would you want to be in a CC-list?
* Or would you want to make your name completely removed from
  piklab owner list?

Comment 31 Alain Portal 2007-04-11 12:45:05 UTC
(In reply to comment #30)
> I can see the URL correctly. Still can't you access, Alain?

Still have problem for all the site.

> If still you cannot, please answer the following questions.
> 
> * Would you want to be a co-maintainer?
> * Would you want to be in a CC-list?
> * Or would you want to make your name completely removed from
>   piklab owner list?

After a discussion with Chitlesh, he become co-.
maintainer

Comment 32 Chitlesh GOORAH 2007-04-11 13:05:40 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: piklab
Updated Fedora Owners: cgoorah.au, alain.portal

Comment 33 Alain Portal 2007-04-18 17:58:55 UTC
Chitlesh,
I added a patch for fr.po, commited the files, tag the branch, but I can't 
build from home. Please, could you do?

Comment 34 Chitlesh GOORAH 2007-04-19 08:37:54 UTC
Done.

Comment 35 Alain Portal 2007-07-20 18:42:03 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: piklab
Updated Fedora Owners: alain.portal

Please, add my home email in comps because I'm on vacation for 6 weeks.

Comment 36 Alain Portal 2010-02-08 19:21:50 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: piklab
New Branches: EL-5
Owners: dionysos

Comment 37 Kevin Fenzi 2010-02-09 00:32:44 UTC
cvs done.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.