https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315319 Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> --- The standalone spec file has better dependencies. I will use it for this review. URL and Source0 addresses are usable Ok. Source archive is original (SHA-256: 4e762a454cf301ebb537a2080b942711c93640013204b2461452fdc60c0a2f85). Ok. License verified from README, LICENSE, lib/ExtUtils/HasCompiler.pm, Makefile.PL. Ok. Summary verified from lib/ExtUtils/HasCompiler.pm. Ok. Description verified from lib/ExtUtils/HasCompiler.pm. Ok. I agree the perl-devel should not be run-required as the module is designed to report missing compiler and Perl header files. I'm not sure about build-requring it. The tests use ExtUtils::CBuilder for that and it is build-required. All tests pass. Ok $ rpmlint perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler.spec ../SRPMS/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Mar 7 18:03 /usr/share/doc/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1824 Jul 15 2015 /usr/share/doc/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler/Changes -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 384 Jul 15 2015 /usr/share/doc/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler/README drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Mar 7 18:03 /usr/share/licenses/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18358 Jul 15 2015 /usr/share/licenses/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler/LICENSE -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1641 Mar 7 18:03 /usr/share/man/man3/ExtUtils::HasCompiler.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Mar 7 18:03 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ExtUtils -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6136 Jul 15 2015 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ExtUtils/HasCompiler.pm File layout and permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1) 1 perl(base) 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(Config) 1 perl(DynaLoader) 1 perl(Exporter) 1 perl(ExtUtils::Mksymlists) 1 perl(File::Basename) 1 perl(File::Spec::Functions) 1 perl(File::Temp) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(ExtUtils::HasCompiler) = 0.012 1 perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler = 0.012-1.fc25 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.012-1.fc25.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F25 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13262026). Ok. This package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines. Resolution: Package APPROVED. -- 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