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-POE-Component-Client-DNS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198880 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-07-15 12:44 EST ------- I have to tell you that the "0" release violates the naming guidelines; please make sure to bump this to "1" before you build. I enabled the test suite just to try it, but I don't think it works under mock due to an undefined network configuration. However, five of the tests did run properly. * source files match upstream: 17d8823b50185e4a2536ca8888d45410 POE-Component-Client-DNS-0.99.tar.gz O package meets naming and packaging guidelines (0 release should be 1) * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (BR: perl is redundant) O No need to pass any compiler flags. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: perl(POE::Component::Client::DNS) = 0.99 perl-POE-Component-Client-DNS = 0.99-0.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(Net::DNS) perl(POE) perl(Socket) perl(constant) perl(strict) perl(vars) * noarch package; no debuginfo. * %check is present but necessarily disabled for mock. * 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. * 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. APPROVED -- 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