Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bitlbee https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196591 ------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxx 2006-09-01 08:21 EST ------- oops. I hadnt seen this request, so i had started my own submission. Robert, please see bug 204884, where I made my package of bitlbee, having missed yours. I added one patch to fix an accept() call warning on x86_64. I also just used openssl since everyone has that installed. My configure also has some different arguments then yours. I am not sure why you need to make those perl calls. I didn't seem to need that. I used condrestart for xinetd, instead of just blindly starting it. I'll check your source rpm's xinetd file to see if you only bind to 127.0.0.1 as well, and install and compile it to see how it works on my system compared to the package I had made. Can bitlbee actually write to its config dir which you chown as "daemon"? I will do more testing for your package later today. It's time this package moves forward. As a seperate upstream bug, I think bitlbee's proxy use is not working, but that also needs more testing on my end. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review