Spec URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec SRPM URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec Description: The Net::DNS::SEC modules provide perl with the ability to check and resolve secure DNS data (DNSSEC). (I don't currently have a sponsor, although there are other packages I've submitted as well tagged as needing a sponsor as well).
Copy and paste error on your SRPM URL. Please fix.
Spec URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec SRPM URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.src.rpm (whoops).
Spec URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec SRPM URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC-0.14-1.src.rpm (double whoops).
perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA, perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random and perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-BigNum haven't appeared yet on the mirrors, so the mock build still fails. I'll try that again tomorrow.
Welcome to the new world. They're available on Koji due to a special tag (I know because I had to request them). They're also published in -testing, so you should be able to grab the rpms from testing or enable the testing repository within mock to get it to build. They've only just been published, so I've been trying to be polite and wait 2 weeks before rolling to stable. (and actually, you using them for this from testing would provide some positive feedback on the fact they work ;-)
I grabbed them from devel. Missing BuildRequires: > Checking if your kit is complete... > Looks good > Warning: prerequisite Digest::SHA 5.23 not found. > Writing Makefile for Net::DNS::SEC 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: x86_64/f7 [x] Rpmlint output: [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 [x] 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 : a87e3e4c8467ea2d64408abae2abcfc6 MD5SUM upstream package: a87e3e4c8467ea2d64408abae2abcfc6 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR: Arches excluded: Why: [!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. Missing Digest::SHA >= 5.23 [-] The spec file handles locales properly. [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [x] 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). [x] 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. [-] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: not tested because some BuildRequires haven't propagated yet [ ] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested on: x86_64/f7 [x] Package functions as described. [x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [ ] File based requires are sane. APPROVED if the missing buildrequire is added.
Spec URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec SRPM URL: http://www.hardakers.net/FE/perl-Net-DNS-SEC-0.14-2.src.rpm Also added some example scripts into the documentation. Full diff of the spec file (the only thing changed) is below: diff -u perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec.old perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec --- perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec.old 2007-07-11 13:19:40.000000000 -0700 +++ perl-Net-DNS-SEC.spec 2007-07-11 13:17:30.000000000 -0700 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ Name: perl-Net-DNS-SEC Version: 0.14 -Release: 1%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: DNSSEC modules for Perl License: GPL or Artistic Group: Development/Libraries @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl(Math::BigInt) BuildRequires: perl(Time::Local) BuildRequires: perl(Digest::BubbleBabble) -BuildRequires: perl(Digest::SHA1) +BuildRequires: perl(Digest::SHA) # neither are picked up automagically. Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo $version)) @@ -59,10 +59,15 @@ %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc Changes README TODO demo/* +%doc Changes README TODO +%doc demo/ %{perl_vendorlib}/* %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog +* Wed Jul 11 2007 Wes Hardaker <wjhns174> - 0.14-2 +- BuildRequire Digest::SHA +- include the demo scripts in the documentation + * Wed Apr 18 2007 Wes Hardaker <wjhns174> - 0.14-1 - Initial version
marking approved based on above comment and jabber conversation about the module.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: perl-Net-DNS-SEC Short Description: Perl bindings to the Net::DNS::SEC modules Owners: wjhns174 Branches: FC-6 F-7 InitialCC:
I realize that Paul said he would approve in comment #6, but it still looks bad for you to set the approval on your own package. (If for record keeping if nothing else). cvs-done.
I agree, but he had asked me to do it over a jabber conversation... Paul, it might be wise if you at least post a note here confirming everything is good.
Package finally marked as going to testing after getting prereqs into koji. closing!
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: perl-Net-DNS-SEC New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: hardaker (I'm willing to co-maintain this and/or order branches of this package: pwouters)
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: perl-Net-DNS-SEC New Branches: el7 Owners: hardaker pwouters