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 219086
| Summary: | Review Request: perl-Geo-Functions - Standard Geo:: functions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jose Pedro Oliveira <jose.p.oliveira.oss> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Parag AN(पराग) <panemade> |
| 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: | 2006-12-11 21:20:28 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: | 219084 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 163779, 219087 | ||
|
Description
Jose Pedro Oliveira
2006-12-10 17:07:10 UTC
I installed perl-Geo-Constants-0.05-1 then i built this package and installed
and i found now
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Geo
is owned by both packages.
I think this package's SPEC need to change line under %files
%{perl_vendorlib}/Geo/
to
%{perl_vendorlib}/Geo/Functions.pm
OR is that ok for perl packages? (In reply to comment #2) > OR is that ok for perl packages? It is a MUST. Perl module-package must own all dirs which are not owned by the base perl-packages or a standard filesystem packages. BTW: The same consideration also applies to other "module-like" systems. (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > OR is that ok for perl packages? > It is a MUST. > > Perl module-package must own all dirs which are not owned by the base > perl-packages or a standard filesystem packages. > > BTW: The same consideration also applies to other "module-like" systems. Thanks for info. So perl modules, python modules MUST own all directories. Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPMS. + source files match upstream. 32a4eb2ec009cec6c2175d9166ffd911 Geo-Functions-0.04.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. + %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required. + %doc does not affect runtime. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + %check used make test PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t t/base....ok All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=31, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 cusr + 0.00 csys = 0.02 CPU) + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Dose owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Followed perl packaging guidelines. APPROVED. Thanks for the review. Package imported and built for FC-5, FC-6, and devel. |