Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 377391
Package review: perl-MLDBM
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:22 EST
Description of problem:
The review of this package wasn't done and now is needed for branching to EPEL.
Strange howcome this got missed from Merge-Review tickets?
This isn't a merge review; this is one of the packages that came in with the
original import of the pre-extras fedora.us packages. It is possible that an
initial review exists either in that old (and long since dead) bugzilla or in
some old mailing list, although an IRC chat with an ancient history archivist
didn't turn up any leads.
So I'll do a quick review, just to make it official....
* source files match upstream:
* 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 not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
perl(MLDBM) = 2.01
perl-MLDBM = 2.01-5.fc9.1
perl >= 0:5.004
* %check is present and all tests pass:
All tests successful.
Files=4, Tests=22, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.09 cusr + 0.05 csys = 0.14 CPU)
(There is one warning, which looks to be a bug in the test suite)
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
And since this is already in the repo in this state, I'll go ahead and close
this ticket. If you need to make a branching request, just reply and set the
fedora-cvs flag without reopening.