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-Net-Libdnet - Perl Interface to libdnet Alias: perl-Net-Libdnet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239161 ------- Additional Comments From cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-05-09 10:30 EST ------- In %files, %{perl_vendorarch}/Net/* should be %{perl_vendorarch}/Net. Missing br's on: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) perl(Test::More) Fix those two items, and I'll approve. + source files match upstream: cec04f6a07cf9e9ec90077c7f3970ffc Net-Libdnet-0.01.tar.gz cec04f6a07cf9e9ec90077c7f3970ffc ../Net-Libdnet-0.01.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. X BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + debuginfo package looks complete. + rpmlint is silent. + final provides and requires are sane: ** perl-Net-Libdnet-0.01-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm == rpmlint == provides Libdnet.so()(64bit) perl(Net::Libdnet) = 0.01 perl-Net-Libdnet = 0.01-1.fc6 == requires libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libdnet.so.1()(64bit) perl >= 0:5.006 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(AutoLoader) perl(Carp) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(warnings) ** perl-Net-Libdnet-debuginfo-0.01-1.fc6.x86_64.rpm == rpmlint == provides Libdnet.so.debug()(64bit) perl-Net-Libdnet-debuginfo = 0.01-1.fc6 == requires + %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=10, Tests=59, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.26 cusr + 0.16 csys = 0.42 CPU) + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. X 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. -- 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