https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1713315 --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > %install > +perl -pi -e 's,#!.*perl,#!%{__perl},' ex/*.pl TODO: I recommend moving the command to %prep section because it patches the sources. I also recommend using $Config{startperl} Perl variable from a Config module instead of %{__perl} RPM macro. The macro is a shell command and can contain any shell code. While the shell bang line can contain only an execve() command. FIX: Build-require 'perl(feature)', 'perl(strict)','perl(utf8)', 'perl(warnings)'. It seems you forgot to add them. $ rpmlint perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server.spec ../SRPMS/perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server-1.99981-3.20190523gitb09c2c7.fc31.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server-1.99981-3.20190523gitb09c2c7.fc31.noarch.rpm /usr/share/rpmlint/Pkg.py:168: UnicodeWarning: decode() called on unicode string, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693751 s.decode('UTF-8') /usr/share/rpmlint/Pkg.py:168: UnicodeWarning: decode() called on unicode string, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1693751 s.decode('UTF-8') 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. > I think the only reason there is a -II repository is for the authors desire to stress that the module has been mostly rewritten. > For all other intents and purposes this is perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server version 2.0 (a 1.9... prerelease) and the name conflict > is intentional, even the readme says so. The readme says: This is a second verson available as AnyEvent-HTTP-Server-II. The first version is now obsolette. If the author wanted to obsolete AnyEvent-HTTP-Server, he would use the same name and uploaded it to CPAN under that name. None of that happened. It's a different project with a different name. Also imagine that somebody wanted to package the real AnyEvent-HTTP-Server from CPAN. Occupying the name prevents him from doing it. Also naming it perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server makes an impression that it is the AnyEvent-HTTP-Server project, but that's not true. It has a completely different author. I really think this should be named perl-AnyEvent-HTTP-Server-II. Once upstream renames it to AnyEvent-HTTP-Server, you can also rename the package. Please do not make any assumptions about author's intentions and follow the current naming. If you don't agree, we can ask Fedora Packaging Committee for their opinion. > This sounds to me like a regression in rpm-build, the release notes for rpm 4.13 explicitly say > "Filter automatic unversioned dependencies when versioned ones exist (RhBug:678605)" with rationale being a perl related bug Minimizing dependencies among manually specified and generated ones has never worked. That's my experience. I believe RPM maintainers never intended to fix bug #678605 completely. Instead they only remove unversioned generated dependencies if a versioned generated dependency exists. But that's more or less irrelevant now because the dependency generator for Perl is maintained in perl-generators now and perl-generators itself does not produce redundant dependencies. You can reopen the bug if you are not content with the rpm-build behavior. In this package, you can either patch sources to list the minimal version at places where they load the modules, or you can use <https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering/> filtering like this: %global __requires_exclude %{?__requires_exclude:%{__requires_exclude}|}^perl\\(AnyEvent|Digest::SHA1|JSON::XS)\\)$ Please add the missing build-requires, rename the package and provide a new spec file. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
