package-review August 2020

package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
998 discussions

[Bug 1481597] Review request: python-karborclient
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481597 --- Comment #12 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> --- Picking it up to review it or close it. Alfredo, are you still interested in this package? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1481597] Review request: python-karborclient
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481597 Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? | |needinfo?(amoralej(a)redhat.c | |om) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1481597] Review request: python-karborclient
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481597 Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andymenderunix(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |andymenderunix(a)gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1333928] Review Request: python-searchlightclient - OpenStack Indexing and Search API Client Library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333928 --- Comment #9 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> --- Alfredo and Haikel, what is the current situation of this request? Neither the latest SPEC files nor the SRPMs can be downloaded anymore. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1333928] Review Request: python-searchlightclient - OpenStack Indexing and Search API Client Library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333928 Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? | |needinfo?(karlthered@gmail. | |com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1333928] Review Request: python-searchlightclient - OpenStack Indexing and Search API Client Library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333928 Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andymenderunix(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |andymenderunix(a)gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1111691] Review Request: qore - multithreaded programming/scripting language
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Aug '20

01 Aug '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111691 --- Comment #41 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix(a)gmail.com> --- > %global module_dir %{_libdir}/qore-modules > %global user_module_dir %{_datarootdir}/qore-modules/ Not a requirement, but %{_datadir} resolves to the same directory - "/usr/share". > Summary: Multithreaded Programming Language > Name: qore > Version: 0.9.4.5 > Release: 1%{?dist} > License: LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ or MIT > Group: Development/Languages > URL: http://qore.org > Source0: https://github.com/qorelanguage/qore/releases/download/release-%{version}/%… > Requires: /usr/bin/env > BuildRequires: gcc-c++ > BuildRequires: flex >= 2.5.31 > BuildRequires: bison > BuildRequires: openssl-devel > BuildRequires: pcre-devel > BuildRequires: zlib-devel > BuildRequires: gmp-devel > BuildRequires: mpfr-devel > BuildRequires: doxygen > BuildRequires: pkgconfig > BuildRequires: bzip2-devel Not a strict requirement, but I would split the initial tags into blocks and improve formatting a bit: %global module_dir %{_libdir}/qore-modules %global user_module_dir %{_datarootdir}/qore-modules/ Name: qore Version: 0.9.4.5 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Multithreaded Programming Language License: LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ or MIT Group: Development/Languages URL: http://qore.org Source0: https://github.com/qorelanguage/qore/releases/download/release-%{version}/%… Requires: /usr/bin/env BuildRequires: gcc-c++ BuildRequires: flex >= 2.5.31 BuildRequires: bison BuildRequires: openssl-devel BuildRequires: pcre-devel BuildRequires: zlib-devel BuildRequires: gmp-devel BuildRequires: mpfr-devel BuildRequires: doxygen BuildRequires: pkgconfig BuildRequires: bzip2-devel > License: LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ or MIT > Group: Development/Languages - I would add a comment above the License block with this link: https://github.com/qorelanguage/qore/blob/develop/README-LICENSE to make it clear that depending on the license choice, different modules are enabled or disabled. `licensecheck` complains a great deal, unfortunately. - The Group: tag is obsolete and should be removed. - "/usr/bin/env" is a part of the coreutils package, but since it's a part of the base system, this Requires can probably be removed. - Check which of the BuildRequires for -devel package can be replaced with pkgconfig(foo). Relevant section of the Packaging Guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PkgConfigBuildReq… The main package should probably contain Requires like these to make sure all of the subpackages are correctly linked to the main package: Requires: %{name}-libqore%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Requires: %{name}-stdlib%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} etc. > %package -n libqore > Summary: The libraries for the qore runtime and qore clients > Group: System Environment/Libraries > Provides: qore-module(abi)%{?_isa} = 0.23 > Provides: qore-module(abi)%{?_isa} = 0.22 - The Group tag is obsolete and should be removed. - rpmlint complains about the abi provides: libqore.x86_64: E: useless-provides qore-module(abi)(x86-64) I couldn't find anything explicit in the Packaging Guidelines, but perhaps you can remove these? > Provides: libqore6 = %{version} > Obsoletes: libqore6 < %{version} I'm wondering about these lines. Neither qore, nor any version of libqore is in the repositories so I don't think these are needed. > %files -n libqore > %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6.2.0 > %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6 > %doc COPYING.LGPL COPYING.GPL COPYING.MIT README.md README-LICENSE README-MODULES RELEASE-NOTES AUTHORS ABOUT The COPYING.* files are license files and they should be tagged with the %license macro. > %post -n libqore -p /sbin/ldconfig > %postun -n libqore -p /sbin/ldconfig Running ldconfig is no longer needed and these lines should be removed. > %package stdlib > Summary: Standard library modules > Group: System Environment/Libraries > Requires: libqore = %{version}-%{release} > Requires: qore-module(abi)%{?_isa} = 0.23 - Group tags are obsolete and should be removed. - Use a fully qualified version Requires like so: Requires: %{name}-libqore%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} - The abi requirement can probably be removed. > %files stdlib > %{user_module_dir} > %{module_dir} > %doc COPYING.MIT README-LICENSE - The %{module_dir} global definition should end with a slash to make the package own the directory like it's done in %{user_module_dir}. - COPYING.MIT is a license file and should be listed with the %license macro. > %files doc > %doc docs/lang docs/modules/* examples/ COPYING.LGPL COPYING.GPL COPYING.MIT README-LICENSE The COPYING.* files are license files and should be listed with the %license macro. > %dir %{_libdir}/cmake > %{_libdir}/cmake/Qore > %{_includedir}/* - Should this package own the /usr/lib/cmake dir? That doesn't sound right. I would use the following instead: %{_libdir}/cmake/Qore/ - %{_includedir}/* is a really bad idea. Maybe it would be better to have something like this? %{_includedir/qore/ > %files devel-doc > %doc docs/library/html/* COPYING.LGPL COPYING.GPL COPYING.MIT README-LICENSE The COPYING.* files are license files and should be listed with the %license macro. > %package misc-tools > Summary: Miscellaneous user tools writen in Qore Programming Language > License: LGPL-2.0+ or GPL-2.0+ or MIT > Group: Development/Tools/Other > Requires: qore = %{version}-%{release} > BuildArch: noarch - The License block contains invalid license definitions. Use the same ones as listed for the main package. - Group tags are obsolete and should be removed. - Use a fully qualified version Requires like so: Requires: %{name}-qore%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Although I'm not sure whether here it makes sense if the main qore package were to explicitly Requires qore-misc-tools like I suggested earlier. > %files misc-tools > %defattr(-,root,root,-) Use of %defattr is obsolete and should be removed. > %build > export CXXFLAGS="%{optflags}" > %files > %{_bindir}/qore > %{_bindir}/qdbg > %{_bindir}/qdbg-server > %{_bindir}/qdbg-remote > %{_bindir}/qdbg-vsc-adapter > %{_mandir}/man1/qore.1.* Do the individual subpackages have their own manpages? > %configure --disable-debug --disable-dependency-tracking > make %{?_smp_mflags} Use %make_build instead of running make and supplying the smp flags. > %install > make install prefix=%{_prefix} DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT - See whether it's possible to replace this entire "make instalL" call with %make_install. - Also, add the "-p" flag to %make_install to preserve timestamps. Here's the full review matrix for further reference (it's not flawless, so some items might not be 100% accurate): Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. Note: /sbin/ldconfig called in libqore See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets - 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 is included in %license. Note: License file COPYING.GPL is not marked as %license See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/qore/qore/diff.txt See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "*No copyright* Expat License", "Expat License BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "Expat License", "ISC License BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "ISC License", "GPL (v3 or later)", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "FSF All Permissive License", "FSF Unlimited License (with Retention) GNU General Public License (v2)", "FSF Unlimited License (with Retention)", "NTP License", "Boost Software License 1.0". 29034 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/qore/qore/licensecheck.txt Review: discussed before. [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Review: Use %license macros where mentioned. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/qore [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/qore [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: %defattr present but not needed [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [?]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [!]: Package does not generate any conflict. Review: see earlier comments about the use of %{_includedir}. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. Review: Obsoletes and Provides added, but not needed. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. Review: see comments on /usr/bin/env [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [?]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 256000 bytes in 11 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in libqore , qore-stdlib , qore-misc-tools Review: see earlier comments. [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 4853760 bytes in /usr/share Review: Is this an artifact of fedora-review or is an extra qore-data package required? [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: qore-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm libqore-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-stdlib-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-doc-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.noarch.rpm qore-devel-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-devel-doc-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.noarch.rpm qore-misc-tools-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.noarch.rpm qore-debuginfo-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-debugsource-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.src.rpm qore.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multithreaded -> Multicolored qore.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdbg qore.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdbg-remote qore.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdbg-server qore.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdbg-vsc-adapter libqore.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) qore -> wore, ore, sore libqore.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qore -> Ore, Sore, Tore libqore.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US qore -> wore, ore, sore libqore.x86_64: E: useless-provides qore-module(abi)(x86-64) qore-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation qore-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdx qore-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qpp qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) writen -> write, written, writes qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: invalid-license LGPL-2.0+ qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0+ qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-documentation qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qdp qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qget qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rest qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary saprest qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary schema-reverse qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sfrest qore-misc-tools.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sqlutil qore.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multithreaded -> Multicolored 10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 23 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: qore-debuginfo-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-devel-debuginfo-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm qore-stdlib-debuginfo-0.9.4.5-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-devel-doc (none): E: no installed packages by name qore (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-stdlib (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-misc-tools (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-debuginfo (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-debugsource (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-stdlib-debuginfo (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-devel (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-devel-debuginfo (none): E: no installed packages by name libqore (none): E: no installed packages by name qore-doc 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/qorelanguage/qore/releases/download/release-0.9.4.5/qore… : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 13741985900dfbb494f1b6304d1f6fb958de1168bd8a46325a8cc2b90a1de562 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 17c8993f4c26b4ae92ec240176eda5e952c52876d7a424fb3b51dc46360d26c0 diff -r also reports differences Requires -------- qore (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libqore.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) libqore (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libbz2.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libmpfr.so.6()(64bit) libpcre.so.1()(64bit) libssl.so.1.1()(64bit) libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) qore-stdlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libqore libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) qore-module(abi)(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) qore-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): qore-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libqore(x86-64) libqore.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) qore-devel-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): qore-misc-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): qore qore-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): qore-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- qore: qore qore(x86-64) libqore: libqore libqore(x86-64) libqore.so.6()(64bit) libqore6 qore-module(abi)(x86-64) qore-stdlib: qore-stdlib qore-stdlib(x86-64) qore-doc: qore-doc qore-devel: pkgconfig(qore) qore-devel qore-devel(x86-64) qore-devel-doc: qore-devel-doc qore-misc-tools: qore-misc-tools qore-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) qore-debuginfo qore-debuginfo(x86-64) qore-debugsource: qore-debugsource qore-debugsource(x86-64) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 0

[Bug 1858971] New: Review Request: nicotine+ - A graphical client for Soulseek
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 Jul '20

31 Jul '20

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858971 Bug ID: 1858971 Summary: Review Request: nicotine+ - A graphical client for Soulseek Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: pikachu.2014(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/nicotine+/nicotine+.spec SRPM URL: https://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/nicotine+/nicotine+-2.0.1-1.f… Description: Nicotine+ is a graphical client for the Soulseek peer-to-peer file sharing network. It is an attempt to keep Nicotine working with the latest libraries, kill bugs, keep current with the Soulseek protocol, and add some new features that users want and/or need. Fedora Account System Username: melmorabity Note: this package was retired during F32 development last year (no Python 3 support at this time). The latest releases of Nicotine+ now supports Python 3. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

1 9

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

package-review August 2020