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-Test-use-ok - Alternative to Test::More::use_ok Alias: perl-Test-use-ok https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235954 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-04-10 23:44 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Missing: > > > > BR: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) > > BR: perl(Test::More) > > BR: perl(Test::Harness) > > So updated (thanks for the catch). Are we at the point now where we should > expect to list all module dependencies, including code? (e.g., not just > ExtUtils::MakeMaker). Well, the list above is the result of testing the latest perl packaging (as discussed on perl-devel-list@), which has several modules formerly contained in "perl" split out. I don't know about RH's plans nor whether or when we're going to see this split perl package in Fedora. A side-effect of this split-out is building perl-modules having to explictly BR: those "now/soon to be split-out" modules formerly having been in "perl" they actually use when building. In most cases this is "ExtUtils::MakeMaker", but ins some cases, it is more - This package is one of those case. More generally: Blindly adding "BR: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)" isn't the solution. One has to track down these modules individually. Fortunately, most package bomb out with build-failures pretty hard in a buildsystems carrying the "split perl" package. -- 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