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-Data-Alias https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202876 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-08-17 20:38 EST ------- You should be careful with that method of requires filtering, because there's no guarantee that __perl_provides will always be /usr/lib/rpm/perl.prov. The safest method is detailed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl. That said, many modules do use it and it is relatively simple. Other than that there's not much to say. * source files match upstream: 390fc2fefbf3fa9bf30d482a46989953 Data-Alias-1.0.tar.gz * 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. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: Alias.so()(64bit) perl(Data::Alias) = 1.0 perl-Data-Alias = 1.0-1.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Data::Alias) = 1.0 perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful, 1 test skipped. Files=26, Tests=561, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.78 cusr + 0.25 csys = 1.03 CPU) The skipped test checks for the //= operator and won't run otherwise; I think that's a Perl6 thing. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * 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. 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