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-Event https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194559 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-14 14:57 EST ------- It's best to start Release: at one once you get into the repository. No need to say "Event" twice in the Summary. We usually state the license as "GPL or Artistic". No need to BR: perl. /usr/bin/iconv is part of glibc so it's safe to leave it out. Similarly, ExtUtils::MakeMaker is in the base perl package. Technically you don't need any BR:s at all for this package. There's no real need to generate the licenses, but it doesn't hurt at all. The package builds fine on x86_64, development. rpmlint has this to say: W: perl-Event devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/Event/EventAPI.h We generally accept these in Perl packages. (It's a perl-internal header and it would be foolish to put one file with no dependencies in a -devel subpackage.) Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. O specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently (see summary issue above) * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * source files match upstream: 789cc8f0b011653cac6451cfef3053a8 Event-1.06.tar.gz * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (technically none are required). * package builds in mock (x86_64, development). * rpmlint has only ignorable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: Event.so()(64bit) perl(Event) perl(Event::Event::Dataful) perl(Event::Event::Io) perl(Event::MakeMaker) perl(Event::Watcher) perl(Event::Watcher::Tied) perl(Event::generic) perl(Event::generic::Source) perl(Event::group) perl(Event::idle) perl(Event::io) perl(Event::signal) perl(Event::timer) perl(Event::type) perl(Event::var) perl-Event = 1.06-0.fc6 - libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) perl >= 1:5.6.0 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(Config) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Event::Watcher) perl(Time::HiRes) perl(base) perl(integer) perl(strict) perl(vars) * shared libraries are present, but internal to Perl. * 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=24, Tests=126, 13 wallclock secs ( 2.87 cusr + 0.56 csys = 3.43 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 (except those internal to Perl) * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED; please fix up the summary. If you wish, fix up the BR:s and the License:. -- 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