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-eperl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199028 ------- Additional Comments From cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-07-18 01:23 EST ------- I struggled with the naming a bit, as eperl is more than just a perl module. However, it is indeed a module "and then some", which I believe makes it appropriate to prefix "perl-". The website and documentation also switch from "ePerl" to "eperl" fairly frequently, so I defer to the packager. + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) + license field matches the actual license. + license is open source-compatible. (GPL or Artistic) + License text included in package. + source files match upstream: 9af0f728e08ef8b3cf45f13782cc28da eperl_2.2.14-13.diff.gz 9af0f728e08ef8b3cf45f13782cc28da eperl_2.2.14-13.diff.gz.srpm 0213580b6711b5312d1873f9732ae8d6 eperl-2.2.14.tar.gz 0213580b6711b5312d1873f9732ae8d6 eperl-2.2.14.tar.gz.srpm + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. package builds in mock (devel/fc5 x86_64). + rpmlint is silent. + final provides and requires are sane: ePerl.so()(64bit) Perl(Parse::ePerl) = 2.2.14 perl-eperl = 2.2.14-2.fc5 = libdb-4.3.so()(64bit) libgdbm.so.2()(64bit) libperl.so()(64bit) perl >= 0:5.00325 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(AutoLoader) perl(Carp) perl(Cwd) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(vars) + no shared libraries in the system dynamic paths 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: t/01_load..........ok t/02_preprocess....ok t/03_translate.....ok t/04_precompile....ok t/05_evaluate......ok t/06_expand........ok t/07_delimiter.....ok All tests successful. Files=7, Tests=9, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.16 cusr + 0.11 csys = 0.27 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. + not a web 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