https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079613 --- Comment #2 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to David Dick from comment #1) > Line 50 is ok > > %{perl_vendorlib}/* > > but you could change it to > > %{perl_vendorlib}/Data/* > > to avoid shared package ownerships No. Perl-modules packages MUST share ownerships on everything they install below %{perl_vendorlib}. Using %{perl_vendorlib}/Data/* would be a mistake and be wrong. > FIX: > > BR perl Well, I guess your are aware, BR perl is controversial? a) Fedora packages are not required to BR: packages which are in mock defaults (perl is one of them). b) The package uses %{__perl} in %build => If at all, then BR: %{__perl} would make sense. > BR perl(constant) > BR perl(Exporter) > Requires perl(Exporter) Done. > TODO: > > BR perl(Pod::Coverage::TrustPod) > BR perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) >= 1.08 > BR perl(Test::Pod) > 1.41 This package's upstream treats Pod tests as optional. As they are not of much importance function-wise and because many perl-modules maintainers discourage packagers from running them, I have adopted the habit not to insist on excercising pod tests in perl packages, anymore. They are not worth the hassle they are causing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review