Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: Perl library module for curses-based menus & data-entry templates.
When i ran rpmlint on Binary RPM i got E: perl-perlmenu no-binary W: perl-perlmenu siteperl-in-perl-module /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/menuutil.pl W: perl-perlmenu siteperl-in-perl-module /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/perlmenu.pm I am totally new to Perl packaging and when i checked perl packaging wiki page(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl), it did not help me. This is my first perl package.
Use the perl template spec from fedora-rpmdevtools as a starting point instead.
Or use cpanspec, which is in Extras. (Although wow, this thing is packaged *really* poorly. cpanspec dies fairly spectacularly on it.) Since that isn't going to work, here are some useful suggestions: > Source0: http://mirror.gnowledge.org/cpan/authors/id/S/SK/SKUNZ/perlmenu.v%{version}.tar.gz Don't hard-code a mirror. Use www.cpan.org. > install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT{%{perl_sitelib},%{_usrsrc}/examples/%{name}-%{version}} > install -m 644 perlmenu.pm menuutil.pl $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{perl_sitelib} > %{perl_sitelib}/* s/sitelib/vendorlib/g I don't think %{_usrsrc} is ever an appropriate place for anything. Try just including "%doc examples" in your %files section. If you "find examples -type f -exec chmod 644 {} \;" in %prep, rpm shouldn't pick up any dependencies from the example scripts either.
as per your suggestions i added foolowing line with examples %doc FAQ MENUUTIL_DOC MENU_DOC README RELEASE_NOTES TO_DO COPYING examples but i got cp: cannot stat `examples': No such file or directory how can i solve this?
I checked for above error, it will not work as source itself does not contain any examples directory. So i tried to overwirte docdir but it failed with error: magic_file(ms, "/var/tmp/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5-root-root/usr/share/doc/perl-perlmenu-4.0/examples") failed: mode 040755 cannot open `/var/tmp/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5-root-root/usr/share/doc/perl-perlmenu-4.0/examples' (No such file or directory) rpmbuild: rpmfc.c:1251: rpmfcClassify: Assertion `ftype != ((void *)0)' failed. Aborted My Updated files Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-1.fc5.src.rpm
Created attachment 132698 [details] Proposed spec * Add BuildArch: noarch. * Create "examples" directory and move the examples to it. * Fix permissions, script interpreter on examples.
Oh, one other tip... Be sure to update Release and your changelog as you make changes during a review.
Thnaks for helping for solving examples directory problem. I saw the SPEC file and understood that i have to do mkdir examples under %prep. Updates:- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-2.fc5.src.rpm
I need review of this package so that in case if something is remaining in this package i can correct/add it.
Some comments: - IMO, menuutil.pl should not be installed to %{perl_vendorlib} It's not a perl module, it's not being used by perlmenu.pm, so I don't see much reason to install it. The examples use it as 'require "./menuutil.pl";' so might make some sense to install it to .../examples. - create_menu.pl doesn't use VENDORDIR nor OPTIMIZE. Passing them to create_menu.pl is meaningless.
ok will change the menuutil.pm installation path to examples directory and remove VENDORDIR and OPTIMIZE parameteres to create_menu.pl
I updated package and new package have following links Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-3.fc5.src.rpm
Hey Parag. I would be happy to take a look at reviewing this and potentially sponsoring you, as long as none of the other folks above would like to dive in with a review/sponsorship... Look for a review later tonight or tomorrow unless someone else wants to step in first.
OK - Package name OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. See below - License(LGPL or Artistic) See below - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: b931859ed581970f3fb05420316b39d3 perlmenu.v4.0.tar.gz b931859ed581970f3fb05420316b39d3 perlmenu.v4.0.tar.gz.1 OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - No rpmlint output. SHOULD Items: OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it. OK - Should build in mock. Issues: 1. The license seems to have changed to LGPL or artistic, not GPL. You have: License: GPL or Artistic
Thanks for reviwing this package but i didn't get what you said in Issues? I checked upstream source contains both License file included in tarball so i kept both names under License tag.
The COPYING file and one of the Licenses they say this package is released under is the: GNU LIBRARY GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (LGPL) NOT the GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL)... You need to change "GPL" to "LGPL" in your License tag. Does that make sense?
Ohh sorry my mistake here is updated URL's Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/perl-perlmenu/perl-perlmenu-4.0-4.fc6.src.rpm
The package from comment #17 looks good to me. I see you have closed some of your other submissions. Sorry for the delay in getting you sponsored. Do you still want to maintain this package (and your other open submissions)? I hope so. Note that your (not closed) kmod submissions were likely stalled because kmod's are still in flux. Several of your other packages seem to have been pretty complicated to package, making them difficult for a first time packager. I know you have done a large amount of reviews on pending packages, and it seems to me that you are at the point where you understand the guidelines pretty well. I'm ready to APPROVE this package and sponsor you if you are still interested... let me know.
Thanks Kevin, Because my other package gutenprint is already in a better position and that package required this package, it will not be good to close this bug. I was thinking to close this bug yesterday only like i did others. But i saw already many peoples facing problems with existing gimp-print package. I helped some peoples also by recommending gutenprint and got response from them that this is awesome package and its really really needed here as FC is my favorite distro. Therefore i submitted package here. So i will continue to have maintainership for this and gutenprint package. But will not going to reopen my other bugs at all.
Ok. I think thats unfortunate, but I'm glad you are willing to maintain this and gutenprint (once it's approved). Perhaps down the road you will be interested in trying to get some more packages imported. :) In any case, this package is APPROVED. I would be happy to sponsor you. Can you continue the process from step 10 at: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via email or catch me on the #fedora-extras irc channel (nick: nirik). I can probibly take a look at gutenprint later in the weekend, unless someone else does so first. Don't forget to close this bug as NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built.
I am not able to access CVS at all so may be this bug will be in pending state. Once i got CVS access and i will import package i will CLOSE this bug