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 bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 189044
Summary: | Review Request: perl-Log-Message | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Steven Pritchard <steve> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-05-06 16:07:45 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 188505, 188519, 188523 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 163779, 189046, 189047, 189048 |
Description
Steven Pritchard
2006-04-15 00:08:08 UTC
One warning from the tests; from a quick code inspection I think this is an upstream bug. + make test PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t t/01_Log-Message-Config....ok t/02_Log-Message...........Use of uninitialized value in regexp compilation at t/02_Log-Message.t line 87. ok All tests successful. Files=2, Tests=34, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.14 cusr + 0.04 csys = 0.18 CPU) Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: f04298e81488a5a39930fd417d47656e Log-Message-0.01.tar.gz f04298e81488a5a39930fd417d47656e Log-Message-0.01.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. It seems I forgot the magic word. In case it wasn't obvious from the FE-ACCEPT thing, APPROVED I've opened a ticket for the warning: http://rt.cpan.org//Ticket/Display.html?id=18845 Imported, branches created, and builds requested. |