https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751119 --- Comment #13 from Jan Holcapek <holcapek@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Petr Šabata from comment #10) > * I suppose the patch makes sense then. All the files it's patching are > read-only, though. Consider changing their permissions before running the > %patch macro. When building on Fedora 21, %setup does the following (among other things): /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . I guess it it "fixed" by that. > * You say you're not interested in EPEL5. You can also drop the Buildroot > tag and the whole %clean section. Fixed. > * Line 41, where you remove empty directories, is no longer required either. > Not even in EPEL. Fixed. > * The same applies to %defattr; it can be removed too. Fixed. > * That perl version constraint isn't really necessary. Simply buildrequire > `perl'. Fixed. > * The package still doesn't build; buildrequire Judy-devel to fix this. Fixed. Added runtime install-/runtime dependency to Judy as well. > * There are also some perl buildtime dependencies missing (used by either > tests or the tested code and not guaranteed to be in the buildroot): > - perl(base) > - perl(blib) > - perl(constant) > - perl(Cwd) > - perl(Data::Dumper) > - perl(DynaLoader) > - perl(File::Basename) > - perl(File::Copy) > - perl(strict) > - perl(vars) > - perl(warnings) Fixed. > * You can drop the buildtime dependency on ExtUtils::CBuilder. Leave it to > Module::Build. Fixed. > * There's no need to explicitly require the following at runtime, rpmbuild's > generators will find them automagically: > - perl(Config) > - perl(constant) > - perl(Sub::Exporter) Fixed. > * Regarding the explicit provides -- well, you were right. I apparently > didn't check these files didn't contain any or contained package statements > different from the filenames. Therefore, the following need to be provided > explicitly to satisfy reflexive dependencies (although providing all these > `underscore modules' would be a better option -- feel free to): > - perl(Judy::_tie) > - perl(Judy::1::_impl) > - perl(Judy::1::_obj) > - perl(Judy::1::_tie) > - perl(Judy::HS::_impl) > - perl(Judy::HS::_obj) > - perl(Judy::HS::_tie) > - perl(Judy::L::_impl) > - perl(Judy::L::_obj) > - perl(Judy::L::_tie) > - perl(Judy::Mem::_impl) > - perl(Judy::SL::_dump) > - perl(Judy::SL::_impl) > - perl(Judy::SL::_obj) > - perl(Judy::SL::_tie) Fixed. Yet it (re)introduced the following rpmlint warnings on SRPM: ---cut--- perl-Judy.src:32: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::_tie) perl-Judy.src:33: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::1::_impl) perl-Judy.src:34: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::1::_obj) perl-Judy.src:35: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::1::_tie) perl-Judy.src:36: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::HS::_impl) perl-Judy.src:37: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::HS::_obj) perl-Judy.src:38: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::HS::_tie) perl-Judy.src:39: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::L::_impl) perl-Judy.src:40: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::L::_obj) perl-Judy.src:41: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::L::_tie) perl-Judy.src:42: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::Mem::_impl) perl-Judy.src:43: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::SL::_dump) perl-Judy.src:44: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::SL::_impl) perl-Judy.src:45: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::SL::_obj) perl-Judy.src:46: W: unversioned-explicit-provides perl(Judy::SL::_tie) ---cut--- > * Don't package META.* files in %doc. They are of no use to end users. Fixed. Excluded other useless files as well. Also, rpmlint reports this warning on RPM: ---cut--- perl-Judy.x86_64: E: useless-provides perl(Judy) ---cut--- yet I guess we can safely ignore that. SRPM: https://github.com/holcapek/perl-Judy/raw/master/perl-Judy-0.41-2.fc21.src.rpm Spec: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/holcapek/perl-Judy/master/perl-Judy.spec -- 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