Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 189081
Review Request: perl-Test-Prereq
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:30 EST
Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Prereq/perl-Test-Prereq.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Prereq-1.030-1.src.rpm Description: The prereq_ok() function examines the modules it finds in blib/lib/, blib/script, and the test files it finds in t/ (and test.pl). It figures out which modules they use, skips the modules that are in the Perl core, and compares the remaining list of modules to those in the PREREQ_PM section of Makefile.PL.
I'm assuming perl-Module-Info will be approved, so I'll go ahead and review this. * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 9acb4eb0737bb041e9ece8ad08e127c3 Test-Prereq-1.030.tar.gz 9acb4eb0737bb041e9ece8ad08e127c3 Test-Prereq-1.030.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, i386). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present but necessarily disabled. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED.
Imported into CVS, branches created, and builds requested.