Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=553852 Chris Weyl <cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #6 from Chris Weyl <cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-29 11:46:17 EST --- A couple thoughts here, bearing in mind that it's been a while since I've reviewed a hardcore non-perl package, so I'm liable to miss something :) In arch-specific dir/paths referenced below I'll be using the 64-bit variants, as that's the machine I'm working on right now. * In %build, make is called w/o options, not as "make %{?_smp_mflags}". Any reason we can't include this? (e.g. "build breaks when run in parallel") * It looks like you're installing some sort of web-app as well as apache modules, but there don't appear to be any config files installed where apache can find them. * Given that this is a binary (that is, arch-specific) package, disabling auto req/provides is not a good idea, as shlib / perl requires (at the least) need to be picked up and honored. You're installing shlibs in a system path (/usr/lib64) and a private path (/usr/lib64/httpd/modules). AutoReq/prov off in this situation is not permitted. * You're also packaging a bunch of perl pakcages _outside_ perl's standard library path (aka @INC). Perl provides coming from directories outside @INC need to be filtered out, one cannot simply "use" them w/o specifying the path. Requires coming from directories outside of @INC _are_ valid unless they're private reqs that are part of that same package (e.g. perl(Parse::RecDescent) is a valid req of this package, but perl(PKI::TPS::CAInfoPanel) is not.) Essentially: perl(PKI*) needs to be filtered from both requires and provides, perl(*::cfg.pl) as well. * And speaking of perl(*::cfg.pl) -- this must be flitered, in any form. This is not a valid system-wide dependency that can be managed by rpm: no package will ever provide it. * You're stripping symbols out of shlibs and binaries manually, rather than letting the debuginfo package generation process handle it. Is the automatic process inadequate in some way? If not, why not let the automatic process do it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review