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 191622 - Review Request: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl
Summary: Review Request: perl-Expect - Expect for Perl
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jason Tibbitts
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT 191623
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-05-13 23:27 UTC by Jose Pedro Oliveira
Modified: 2010-03-17 18:01 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-05-17 16:51:31 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
kevin: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jose Pedro Oliveira 2006-05-13 23:27:49 UTC
Spec URL:
http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Expect.spec
SRPM URL:
http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Expect-1.16-1.src.rpm

Description: 
The Perl Expect module was inspired more by the functionality of
Tcl/Expect than any previous Expect-like tool such as Comm.pl or
chat2.pl.

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2006-05-16 18:13:32 UTC
That description is really suboptimal.  How about something like this, partially
stolen from the original Expect description:

This module provides Expect-like functionality to Perl.  Expect is a tool for
automating interactive applications such as telnet, ftp, passwd, fsck, rlogin,
tip, etc.

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* 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:
   f5f0ea179c6f19d9f08e22c6a0072292  Expect-1.16.tar.gz
   f5f0ea179c6f19d9f08e22c6a0072292  Expect-1.16.tar.gz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories 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:
   Passed 36 of 36 tests.
* no scriptlets present.
* 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.

APPROVED, but please fix the description before checking in.

Comment 2 Jose Pedro Oliveira 2006-05-16 18:41:35 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> That description is really suboptimal.  How about something like this, partially
> stolen from the original Expect description:
> 
> This module provides Expect-like functionality to Perl.  Expect is a tool for
> automating interactive applications such as telnet, ftp, passwd, fsck, rlogin,
> tip, etc.

Done.

Importing the new SRPM (updated specfile in same location) 
http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Expect-1.16-2.src.rpm


Comment 3 Jose Pedro Oliveira 2006-05-17 16:51:31 UTC
Thanks for the review.

Imported and built for FC-5 and devel.

Comment 4 Mark Chappell 2010-03-17 16:12:43 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: perl-Expect
New Branches: EL-5
Owners: tremble    

From IRC:

16:06 < tremble> cweyl: Any chance of perl-Expect for EPEL ?
16:07 < cweyl> tremble: probably not from me :)  If you want to branch and own the EPEL bits, I'm ok with that

Comment 5 Kevin Fenzi 2010-03-17 18:01:25 UTC
cvs done.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.