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-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for big numbers support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237332 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-05-09 22:37 EST ------- As should be expected now, this needs BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker). The test suite needs perl(Test) but I'm really not sure if the plan is to split that off or not. Really, that's the only issue I see with this package. Let me go over one more tonight and then we can start getting some of these checked in. * source files match upstream: d709ce87110f0f1ab1c9d957f11239d5c4e411733b0e6ea08576720e1f147c80 Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum-0.03.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. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * 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: Bignum.so()(64bit) perl(Crypt::OpenSSL::Bignum) = 0.03 perl(Crypt::OpenSSL::Bignum::CTX) perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum = 0.03-2.fc7 = libcrypto.so.6()(64bit) perl >= 0:5.005 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(Crypt::OpenSSL::Bignum) perl(DynaLoader) perl(strict) perl(vars) * %check is present and all tests pass: [...] ok 52 + exit 0 * 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 static libraries. * no libtool .la droppings. -- 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