[Bug 239087] Review Request: perl-Nmap-Parser - Parse nmap scan data with perl

[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-Nmap-Parser - Parse nmap scan data with perl
Alias: perl-Nmap-Parser

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239087





------- Additional Comments From cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  2007-05-09 10:16 EST -------
Now that tibbs and Ralf have done the hard work, I'll post my review :)

Note that you can also use sed itself to fix end-of-line-encoding warnings;
"sed -i '/\r//' filename" will do it.  I'm just pointing this out, it's
certainly not a blocker to use dos2unix.

+ source files match upstream:
 5d5f113a9d166b07e041a5dc52f9c3ee  Nmap-Parser-1.05.tar.gz
 5d5f113a9d166b07e041a5dc52f9c3ee  ../Nmap-Parser-1.05.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 correct.
+ license field matches the actual license.
+ license is open source-compatible.  License text included in package.
+ latest version is being packaged.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ compiler flags are appropriate. (noarch)
+ %clean is present.
+ package installs properly
+ rpmlint is silent.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
** perl-Nmap-Parser-1.05-3.fc6.noarch.rpm
== rpmlint
== provides
perl(Nmap::Parser) = 1.05
perl(Nmap::Parser::Host)  
perl(Nmap::Parser::Host::OS)  
perl(Nmap::Parser::Host::Service)  
perl(Nmap::Parser::Session)  
perl-Nmap-Parser = 1.05-3.fc6
== requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)  
perl(Storable)  
perl(XML::Twig)  
perl(strict)  
perl(vars)  
+ %check is present and all tests pass:
 All tests successful.
 Files=4, Tests=171,  1 wallclock secs ( 1.07 cusr +  0.28 csys =  1.35 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.
+ %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
+ no headers.
+ no pkgconfig files.
+ no libtool .la droppings.
+ not a GUI app.

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]