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 - Review Request: perl-Geo-Functions - Standard Geo:: functions
Summary: Review Request: perl-Geo-Functions - Standard Geo:: functions
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Parag AN(पराग)
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 219084
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT 219087
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-12-10 17:07 UTC by Jose Pedro Oliveira
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-12-11 21:20:28 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jose Pedro Oliveira 2006-12-10 17:07:10 UTC 
Spec URL:
ftp://perl.di.uminho.pt/pub/fedora/perl-Geo-Functions.spec

SRPM URL:
ftp://perl.di.uminho.pt/pub/fedora/perl-Geo-Functions-0.04-1.src.rpm

Description:
Standard Geo:: functions.

Note: the Geo::* modules are requirements of Net::GPSD
Comment 1 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-12-11 05:26:00 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
Comment 2 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-12-11 05:40:09 UTC 
OR is that ok for perl packages?
Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2006-12-11 08:21:01 UTC 
(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.
Comment 4 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-12-11 09:38:04 UTC 
(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.
Comment 5 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-12-11 09:40:28 UTC 
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.
Comment 6 Jose Pedro Oliveira 2006-12-11 21:19:03 UTC 
Thanks for the review.

Package imported and built for FC-5, FC-6, and devel.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.