https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1133198 Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx Docs Contact| |paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- rpmlint output ============== 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. requires ======== libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) liblz4.so.1 libperl.so.5.20 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.20.1) perl(Exporter) perl(XSLoader) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) provides ======== perl(Compress::LZ4) = 0.20 perl-Compress-LZ4 = 0.20-1.fc22 perl-Compress-LZ4(x86-32) = 0.20-1.fc22 review checklist ================ - rpmlint clean - package and spec file naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is same as perl, matches upstream, fine for Fedora - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream in content and timestamp - package builds OK in mock for Rawhide (x86_64) - buildreqs ok (but see below) - no locales, devel files, sub-packages to worry about - lz4 library properly unbundled - package is not intended to be relocatable - file and directory ownership OK - no duplicate files - permissions are sane - macro usage is consistent - code, not content - no large docs, and other docs don't affect runtime - not a GUI app, no desktop file needed - filenames are all ASCII nits ==== The unbundling patch could also remove the bundled files from the MANIFEST to stop MakeMaker moaning about them being missing. Test suite uses perl(overload) (t/01_lz4.t:35). Test::More version requirement should really be 0.88 due to the use of done_testing in the test suite. Package is APPROVED. -- 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