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: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 ------- Additional Comments From jvdias@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-03-16 16:32 EST ------- OK, I've resolved each of the issues raised: > - I can't find any evidence of license terms under which this package can be > distributed, which would be a blocker and in need of fixing upstream The rpm has always had tag: 'License: distributable ' and there are no license restrictions or copyright in any source file or on the package CPAN home-page. As perl-RPM2 is already distributed in every Fedora Core and RHEL release except FC-5, these terms are evidently acceptable. > - Extras packages shouldn't have a buildreq on perl This package cannot be built without the perl package being installed; hence, the 'BuildRequires: perl' tag. > - latest changelog release tag doesn't match actual release tag huh? The %{version}-%{release} is 0.66-12 - latest changelog: * Thu Mar 08 2006 Jason Vas Dias <jvdias@xxxxxxxxxx> - 0.66-12 > - some of the tests fail but "make check" passes - why? Because the package was not being built as root. Now, all tests that require root access are skipped if being run by a non-root user, so all tests pass as a non-root user; I've also tested that those tests are run and pass if run by root. > - missing buildreqs elfutils-libelf-devel and bzip2-devel Added. > - using find/filelist method for %files results in unowned directory > %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/RPM2 I've added: %dir %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/RPM2 to %files list. >- consider adding %{?dist} tag if this package is likely to be needed for > future Fedora releases Added. Modified .spec file and srpm at: http://people.redhat.com/~jvdias/perl-RPM2.spec http://people.redhat.com/~jvdias/perl-RPM2-0.66-12.src.rpm -- 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-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
