January 2016 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[opensuse-packaging] Could someone fix Conky on Tumbleweed?
by jcsl 08 Jan '16

08 Jan '16

Hi. I can't install Conky on Tumbleweed because "nothing provides libmicrohttpd.so.10()(64bit) needed by conky-1.10.0-1.1.x86_64". Could someone fix it, please? The package available on Tumbleweed is libmicrohttpd12. Greetings. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] Can someone update stopmotion?
by Christoph Grüninger 06 Jan '16

06 Jan '16

Hi there, in the recent issue of the important German computer magazine c't was an article about "stopmotion". Unfortunately openSuse's Education repository provides only a package for version 0.6.2 which is three years old. The current version 0.8.0 is not yet packed. Could someone be so kind and create an updated openSuse package? Thanks Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 8

[opensuse-packaging] openSUSE:Factory/findutils: source_validator issue
by Bernhard Voelker 05 Jan '16

05 Jan '16

Hello oS packaging fellows, I tried to add the signature checking to findutils, but the Base:System --> oS:F request was auto-declined due to a source_validator failure: On 12/29/2015 06:15 PM, Factory Auto wrote: > Visit https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/351211 > > State of request 351211 was changed by factory-auto: > > review -> declined > > Comment: > Output of check script: > Source validator failed. Try "osc service localrun source_validator" > gpg: Note: signatures using the MD5 algorithm are rejected > gpg: key 64A95EE5: no valid user IDs > gpg: Signature made Mon Dec 28 22:47:23 2015 CET using RSA key ID 64A95EE5 > gpg: Can't check signature: No public key > (E) signature findutils/findutils-4.6.0.tar.gz.sig does not validate > > > > Actions: > - submit Base:System/findutils => openSUSE:Factory/findutils Running the command locally doesn't seem to yield a problem: $ osc co Base:System/findutils \ && cd Base:System/findutils $ osc service localrun source_validator gpg: public key of ultimately trusted key 96917195 not found gpg: 3 marginal(s) needed, 1 complete(s) needed, PGP trust model gpg: depth: 0 valid: 1 signed: 0 trust: 0-, 0q, 0n, 0m, 0f, 1u gpg: Signature made Mon 28 Dec 2015 10:47:23 PM CET using RSA key ID 64A95EE5 gpg: Good signature from "James Youngman <jay(a)gnu.org>" [unknown] gpg: aka "James Youngman <JYoungman(a)vggas.com>" [unknown] gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. Primary key fingerprint: 0C 1C D7 CA 66 33 D2 E9 14 E0 5F 16 D5 24 60 E9 $ echo $? 0 I know that James has updated his key material somewhen in December, but I wouln't know what to do TBH ... other than removing the *.sig and the keyring files again. Any hint? Thanks & have a nice day, Berny -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] SLE_12_SP1 repository in devel projects
by Olaf Hering 04 Jan '16

04 Jan '16

Is there a reason why various projects build for SP3 and SP4 instead of just a generic "SLE_11" target? I think the service packs are compatible when used as a build environment. In packman, devel:languages:ocaml and Virtualization only the generic "SLE_11" and "SLE_12" targets exist for that reason. Since SUSE:SLE-12-SP1:Update already exists (not sure if its already populated) I wonder if it makes sense to adjust just the paths in the existing "SLE_12" repositories instead of creating a new "SLE_12_SP1" repositories in the devel projects. Also I wonder why multimedia:libs builds for SP3 and SP4, instead of just SLE_11. Olaf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 3

Re: [opensuse-packaging] ERROR: No sufficient Category definition
by Dmitriy Perlow 03 Jan '16

03 Jan '16

Thomas Zimmermann <ml(a)vdm-design.de> письме Sat, 02 Jan 2016 17:35:34 +0300: > Hi, Hello! > while building a package for Factory or Leap I always get the following > error: It seems that wiki isn't relevant for Factory/Leap. Just try another group and/or subgroup. -- Best regards, Dmitriy Perlow R&D chemical engineer Lekpharm JLLC -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 4

[opensuse-packaging] ERROR: No sufficient Category definition
by Thomas Zimmermann 02 Jan '16

02 Jan '16

Hi, while building a package for Factory or Leap I always get the following error: > ERROR: No sufficient Category definition: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/root6-6.06.00-57.1.x86_64//usr/share/applications/root6.desktop > Errors in installed desktop file detected. Please refer to http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/RPM_Macros In my .spec file I run the following macro especially to provide a sufficient Category definition: > %suse_update_desktop_file -i -r -N ROOT -G ROOT %{name} Education Science which according to the allowed categories wiki page should be a valid category. I've also tried > %suse_update_desktop_file -i -r -N ROOT -G ROOT %{name} "Education;Science" but this also doesn't work. Does anybody know what I'm doing wrong? Thanks for your help, Thomas The project is located here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:Heinervdm:branches:science/roo… -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0