Missing directory ownerships: The package must own these dirs:
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Text
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/Text

Thanks!
P.S. How did you spot them? Eyeballs?

(In reply to comment #2)
> P.S. How did you spot them? Eyeballs?
More or less yes.

My initial steps before diving into a "formal review" are:
1. Visually inspect the *.spec.
2. rpmbuild -ba *.spec
3. rpmlint *.rpm
4. rpm -qlvp *.rpm (This is where I actually spotted it).
...

Theoretically, rpmlint could have complained, but ... <sigh> rpmlint </sigh>.

Theoretically, I should have noticed it in #1 (packaging perl modules is pretty
simple; I maintain a fair number of perl-modules myself and had been involved
into reviewing many others), but ... things happens, this time it had been step #4.

Yes, rpmlint noticing that would be nice, but it can probably only do so if the
package has been installed, or is there a way to check this on a cold package?

It definitely would require the package to be installed.  But this was discussed
in September on fedora-extras-list and I filed an upstream RFE, but it was
rejected.  rpmlint site is broken at the moment, but when it comes back up, the
RFE can be seen at http://rpmlint.zarb.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/ticket/35

See also http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.maintainers/2883/

Too bad, that would had been a nice addition to rpmlint. Anyway even more thanks
for spotting this with eyeballs. :)

Spec URL: http://dl.atrpms.net/all/perl-Text-CharWidth.spec
SRPM URL: http://dl.atrpms.net/all/perl-Text-CharWidth-0.04-2.at.src.rpm

* Sat Dec 30 2006 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm> - 0.04-2
- Add ownership of some perl folders.

I am unable to download above links.

Sorry, they were moved internally (into my "submit to extras folder") while the
site building scripts were running and they missed it. They have been
resurrected now, please retry.

I'll review this when I get home from work tonight.

[ Withdrawing myself as reviewer of this package due to BuildRoot disagreements.
See bug #220888 comment 15 for information. ]

Good:

- rpmlint on source rpm returns:
E: perl-Text-CharWidth unknown-key GPG#66534c2b
which can safely be ignored
- no output from rpmlint on the generated binary
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines, except for the %buildroot which is not the
preferred value (but non blocker)
- the original tar does not include a license file but the (packaged) README
explicitely states that the software is dual licensed as GPL and Artistic which
are both approved for inclusion in Fedora
- the License field corresponds to the above and therefore is OK
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream, sha1sum returns
b369ce7a531539ebf5b9cf1c1b09d66846f56aa4  Text-CharWidth-0.04.tar.gz
- package compiles on devel (i386)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for separate -docs package
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- no .la files

... I would approve it if I were allowed to...

(In reply to comment #11)

> ... I would approve it if I were allowed to...

You are allowed to... Why not? 

fedorabugs membership ?

More specific,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines#head-e1a114b23499786e13113ebf072d03a8f8d02094

Just follow what is said here... If I recall well once you are
sponsored you can approve packages, being added to fedorabugs is
just a technical issue.

unless someone more experienced then me has additional comments,this packaged is
APPROVED by me

Thanks, package imported, built for devel and CVS branches requested.