Bug 478291

This builds fine and rpmlint is quiet.  However, a couple of comments:

Any reason for not running the included test suite?  It seems to work fine for me with just
  %check
  make check

Does this really depend on Perl?  It seems that it will call Perl if it is present in various cases, but that it doesn't actually depend on it.  rpm of course doesn't know that and generates a /usr/bin/perl dependency anyway.


* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
   1298a549416d12af239e9f4e787e6e6509210afb49d5cf28eb6ec4015046ae19  
   shtool-2.0.8.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none).
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
? final provides and requires:
   shtool = 2.0.8-1.fc11
  =
   /bin/sh
?  /usr/bin/perl
?  perl >= 0:5.000
?  perl(strict)

X %check is not present, but a test suite exists and is easily callable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Any reason for not running the included test suite?  It seems to work fine for
> me with just
>   %check
>   make check

Added, thanks.

> Does this really depend on Perl?  It seems that it will call Perl if it is
> present in various cases, but that it doesn't actually depend on it.  rpm of
> course doesn't know that and generates a /usr/bin/perl dependency anyway.

'shtoolize' has a perl shebang.

Updated files:

Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/shtool.spec
SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/shtool-2.0.8-2.fc10.src.rpm

Somehow I missed your comment; sorry about that.

This package looks fine, thanks.  APPROVED

Thanks for the review, Jason.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: shtool
Short Description: Portable shell tool
Owners: fab
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:

cvs done.

shtool-2.0.8-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update shtool'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-3170

shtool-2.0.8-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update shtool'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-3165

shtool-2.0.8-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

shtool-2.0.8-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

This would be nice to see in EPEL.  Fabian - do you want to support it there or shall I?

(In reply to comment #11)
> This would be nice to see in EPEL.  Fabian - do you want to support it there
> or shall I?

Any new progress now?

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: shtool
New Branches: el6
Owners: orion
InitialCC: 

No response, so I'll take it.

Git done (by process-git-requests).