Bug 237739 (perl-File-Modified)
| Summary: | Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Chris Weyl <cweyl> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Bernard Johnson <bjohnson> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | iarnell |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | bjohnson:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://search.cpan.org/dist/File-Modified/ | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-05-04 03:43:29 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: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 238211 | ||
|
Description
Chris Weyl
2007-04-25 04:42:09 UTC
This package is a prereq of the Catalyst framework. You might want to look into this:
+ make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0,
'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t
t/test....ok
2/44 skipped: Digest:: is installed, 1/44 unexpectedly succeeded
All tests successful (1 subtest UNEXPECTEDLY SUCCEEDED), 2 subtests skipped.
Files=1, Tests=44, 4 wallclock secs ( 0.35 cusr + 0.05 csys = 0.40 CPU)
That appears to be a broken (and badly written) TODO test that doesn't have the decentcy to fail successfully. :) The skipped tests are expected. Patched, added a br of perl(Test::Exception) SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified-0.07-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified.spec Err, that should have been: SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified-0.07-2.fc6.src.rpm I love it ;)
+ find . -type f -name .cvsignore -exec rm -v '{}' ';'
removed `./.cvsignore'
removed `./t/.cvsignore'
...
+ /usr/bin/perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
Checking if your kit is complete...
Warning: the following files are missing in your kit:
.cvsignore
t/.cvsignore
Please inform the author.
Writing Makefile for File::Modified
Just sed those out of the MANIFEST as well.
Also, I see it's still skipping two of the tests:
+ make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0,
'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t
t/test....ok
2/44 skipped: Digest:: is installed
All tests successful, 2 subtests skipped.
Files=1, Tests=44, 3 wallclock secs ( 0.37 cusr + 0.04 csys = 0.41 CPU)
I didn't look at the actuals skipped tests, but if it's indicating that it
doesn't need to run the test because perl(Digest) is installed (and the tests
are irrelevent when perl(Digest) is present), then that should be noted in the
spec file near %check.
(In reply to comment #5) > Just sed those out of the MANIFEST as well. Done. Also filed at rt.cpan.org... > Also, I see it's still skipping two of the tests: ...snip... > I didn't look at the actuals skipped tests, but if it's indicating that it > doesn't need to run the test because perl(Digest) is installed (and the tests > are irrelevent when perl(Digest) is present), then that should be noted in the > spec file near %check. Done -- it's expected, and perl(Digest) is core so it's always going to be there... noted in the spec. SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified-0.07-3.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-File-Modified.spec Package Review
==============
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[x] Rpmlint output: None
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package : 271a991b96ccbdaeb7098272c9f97d51
MD5SUM upstream package: 271a991b96ccbdaeb7098272c9f97d51
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
Arches excluded:
Why:
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== Issues ===
1.
=== Final Notes ===
1.
================
*** APPROVED ***
================
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: perl-File-Modified Short Description: Checks intelligently if files have changed Owners: cweyl.edu Branches: FC-5, FC-6, devel InitialCC: fedora-perl-devel-list Imported and building. I think. Thanks for the review! :) Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: perl-File-Modified New Branches: el6 Owners: iarnell tremble InitialCC: perl-sig Git done (by process-git-requests). |