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-ParseLex - Perl lexical analyzer. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427479 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-15 21:58 EST ------- Some additional comments: This package doesn't build in mock against rawhide; it is missing a build dependency on perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker). The tarball includes a test suite, but the spec doesn't call it. And unfortunately, when I add a check section to call it, test4 fails. I think the test is has simply been broken by some perl update over the past nine years; the difference in the tests is: < can't analyze: "this is an invalid string with a "" in it"" at examples/ctokenizer.pl line 17, <DATA> line 4. --- > can't analyze: "this is an invalid string with a "" in it"" at examples/ctokenizer.pl line 17, <DATA> chunk 4. So s/chunk/line/ in the expected data from the test and it should pass. rpmlint says the following: perl-ParseLex.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/perl-ParseLex-2.15/Changes This should be passed through iconv; see the example in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CommonRpmlintIssues perl-ParseLex.noarch: E: useless-explicit-provides perl(Parse::Token) This is more interesting; rpm extracts the following two dependencies (in addition to several others, of course): perl(Parse::Token) perl(Parse::Token) = 2.15 This comes from the "package Parse::Token;" lines in Token.pm and Token-t.pm. Unfortunately rpm screws up sometimes and these errant dependencies need to be filtered. If you were using cpanspec to generate your specfile then this comes for free with --filter-provides but since you've rolled your own, take a look at the examples at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review