Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579682
Iain Arnell <iarnell(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |iarnell(a)gmail.com
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |iarnell(a)gmail.com
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell <iarnell(a)gmail.com> 2010-05-02 03:02:02 EDT ---
+ source files match upstream.
0add2a0132d582ad81d62b4e38fd3f92 version-0.80.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
+ summary is OK.
+ description is OK.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is OK.
+ license field matches the actual license.
GPL+ or Artistic
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ license text not included upstream.
- latest version is being packaged.
version-0.82 is available
- BuildRequires are proper.
missing perl(Module::Build)
+ compiler flags are appropriate.
+ %clean is present.
+ package builds in mock (after adding missing BR)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2154593
+ package installs properly.
+ rpmlint has no complaints:
perl-version.src: I: checking
perl-version.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/version/
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-version.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/J/JP/JPEACOCK/version-0.80.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
perl-version.x86_64: I: checking
perl-version.x86_64: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/version/
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-version-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
perl-version-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/version/ (timeout 10 seconds)
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
perl(version) = 0.80
perl(version::vxs) = 0.80
vxs.so()(64bit)
perl-version = 0.80-1.fc14
perl-version(x86-64) = 0.80-1.fc14
=
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
perl >= 0:5.005_03
perl >= 0:5.005_04
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
perl(strict)
perl(vars)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
+ %check is present and all tests pass.
./Build test
t/01base.t ..... ok
t/02derived.t .. ok
t/03require.t .. ok
All tests successful.
Files=3, Tests=1382, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.15 usr 0.03 sys + 0.51 cusr
0.05 csys = 0.74 CPU)
Result: PASS
+ no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
+ owns the directories it creates.
+ doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ no generically named files
+ code, not content.
+ documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
+ %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
Looks good - just a couple of little points.
You've commented out the BuildRequires: perl(Module::Build), but it's really
necessary.
There's a newer version-0.82 available now.
And you should probably use %{?perl_default_filter} to avoid providing vxs.so.
With those tweaks, APPROVED.
--
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.