Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at

Bug 165551

Summary: Review Request: perl-Number-Compare
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Ralf Corsepius <rc040203>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Paul Howarth <paul>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: fedora-package-review, oliver
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-08-17 07:32:27 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 163779, 165564    

Description Ralf Corsepius 2005-08-10 12:51:11 UTC
Spec Name or Url:
SRPM Name or Url:
Number::Compare compiles a simple comparison to an anonymous subroutine,
which you can call with a value to be tested again.

Comment 1 Oliver Falk 2005-08-10 13:30:05 UTC
Looks fine. Once again, sure about the license? Shouldn't it be just 'Artistic'?

Comment 2 Paul Howarth 2005-08-10 13:32:50 UTC
The documentation in the package ("man Number::Compare" if you've installed it)

"This module is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under
the same terms as Perl itself"

So it's "Artistic or GPL", the same as perl itself.

Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2005-08-10 13:40:21 UTC
Hmm? May I cite my spec file (line 5):
License:        Artistic or GPL

Comment 4 Paul Howarth 2005-08-10 13:59:16 UTC
Re: Comment #3, I agree with you - it was Comment #1 I was addressing.

Comment 5 Oliver Falk 2005-08-10 14:13:30 UTC
OK, then from my side, it's OK.

Comment 6 Jose Pedro Oliveira 2005-08-10 14:45:59 UTC
Just a minor note:

The following line
  find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.bs' -a -size 0 -exec rm -f {} ';'
is not needed for noarch packages.

Everything else looks good.

Comment 7 Paul Howarth 2005-08-12 17:25:05 UTC

- rpmlint clean
- package/spec follows naming guidelines
- package follows packaging guidelines
- license is OK - same as perl
- spec file is in English and is perfectly legible
- source matches upstream
- build fine in mock for -devel (i386)
- no explicit BRs
- no locales, libraries, headers, pkgconfigs, subpackages to worry about
- not relocatable
- directory ownership OK
- no duplicate files
- file permissions OK
- %clean present and correct
- macro usage is consistent
- code, not content
- no large docs
- manpage does not affect running of package
- package appears to work

Would suggest adding to %description:
Now this would be very pointless, if Number::Compare didn't understand

The target value may use magnitudes of kilobytes (k, ki), megabytes (m, mi),
or gigabytes (g, gi). Those suffixed with an i use the appropriate 2**n
version in accordance with the IEC standard:

Please also note Comment #6 re empty .bs files.