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-File-Type https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192568 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-05-21 12:59 EST ------- A couple of questions: Any idea why Module::Build shows up in the final requires list and if it really needs to be there? What on Earth is the NINJA file for? Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. Text not included upstream. * source files match upstream: 4be3b0b7000b325c60351fcc8a04815d File-Type-0.22.tar.gz 4be3b0b7000b325c60351fcc8a04815d File-Type-0.22.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. ? final provides and requires are sane: perl(File::Type) = 0.22 perl(File::Type::Builder) = 0.11 perl-File-Type = 0.22-1.fc6 - perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(IO::File) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1 perl(Module::Build) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=3, Tests=58, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.13 cusr + 0.06 csys = 0.19 CPU) * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. -- 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