[Bug 239119] Review Request: perl-Class-C3-XS - XS speedups for Class::C3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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-Class-C3-XS - XS speedups for Class::C3
Alias: perl-Class-C3-XS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239119


tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx  2007-05-08 19:28 EST -------
Looks like a new version of this just came out today, but I don't think it will
bother the packaging.

I found it odd that the test suite is installed as documentation.  I don't
suppose it hurts anything and I suppose the code could be instructive.

* source files match upstream:
   7be7a6d69644dd2580d552b01ffcb388e82d203804090bb003b0728dcfbcb8d1  
   Class-C3-XS-0.02.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
O latest version is 0.03
* BuildRequires are proper (including new Perl bits)
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   XS.so()(64bit)
   perl(Class::C3::XS) = 0.02
   perl-Class-C3-XS = 0.02-1.fc7
  =
   perl >= 0:5.008_000
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(XSLoader)
   perl(strict)
   perl(warnings)

* %check is present and all tests pass:
   All tests successful.
   Files=7, Tests=18,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.19 cusr +  0.09 csys =  0.28 CPU)
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* 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.
  (documentation is a bit larger than the rest of the package, but then we're 
  only talking about 20k).
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* 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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]