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 196847 (php-pear-PHPUnit2) - Review Request: php-pear-PHPUnit2 - PEAR: Regression testing framework for unit tests
Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PHPUnit2 - PEAR: Regression testing framework for un...
Alias: php-pear-PHPUnit2
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jason Tibbitts
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On: php-pear-Log php-pecl-xdebug 196802 php-pear-Benchmark
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2006-06-27 07:49 UTC by Christopher Stone
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2006-09-11 20:45:37 UTC
Type: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
logfile from rpmbuild (deleted)
2006-08-31 08:57 UTC, Daniel Rindt
no flags Details

Description Christopher Stone 2006-06-27 07:49:02 UTC
Spec URL:

PHPUnit is a family of PEAR packages (PHPUnit2 for PHP 5, PHPUnit for PHP 4)
that supports the development of object-oriented PHP applications using the
concepts and methods of Agile Software Development, Extreme Programming,
Test-Driven Development and Design-by-Contract Development by providing an
elegant and robust framework for the creation, execution and analysis of
Unit Tests.

Comment 1 Daniel Rindt 2006-08-31 08:57:57 UTC
Created attachment 135268 [details]
logfile from rpmbuild

Comment 2 Daniel Rindt 2006-08-31 08:58:32 UTC
grant me some questions: why it is necessary to build these package as root? and
why is the install method through rpm, instead of using pear?

ok, the way by rpm is even ok and it is possibly better way to avoid obsolete
files in the filesystem. but the build of that package is only possible as root.

attached is a logfile of the buildprocess, unfortunatelly it did not build.

Comment 3 Remi Collet 2006-09-02 08:22:28 UTC
Daniel, Build failed because you didn't use the latest php-pear (1.4.9-1.2 on
fc5) with /etc/rpm/macros.pear.

Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2006-09-10 00:36:50 UTC
I'll go ahead and review this one, but I'll leave the other version of this
package alone because frankly I don't think it's a terribly good idea to include
multiple versions in the same repository in that manner.  It's up to you how you
do version upgrades; if the new version is that much better or more useful and
isn't unstable then I'd just upgrade to it immediately.

Comment 5 Christopher Stone 2006-09-10 00:42:38 UTC
please review the alpha version if you are just going to review one.  This one
is not important to me, the alpha version one I need in FE.

Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2006-09-11 19:25:09 UTC
I'm going to go ahead and approve this.  If you want to update to the alpha
version, or someone else wants to approve the -alpha package, then that's fine
with me.

* source files match upstream:
   95fe5e8dbb36462dd4d3f3daf8a4e8b3  PHPUnit2-2.3.6.tgz
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text is included in each source file.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent (except for the bogus warning)
* final provides and requires are sane:
   php-pear(PHPUnit2) = 2.3.6
   php-pear-PHPUnit2 = 2.3.6-1.fc6
   php >= 5.0.2
* %check is not present; not possible to run the test suite.
* 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.
* 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.


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