Spec URL: http://niscripts.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/rpms/SPECS/perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession.spec
SRPM URL: http://niscripts.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/rpms/SRPMS/perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession-0.30-1.fc8.src.rpm
Description: This module integrates Apache::Session into Mason by adding methods to the Mason Request object available in all Mason components.
This is my first fedora extras package and therefore, I am needing a sponsor.
Thanks in advance.
This one build OK and rpmlint is silent.
I find it odd that there's no %check section even though there are tests. Did
you remove it, or did cpanspec not include it for some reason? I added
./Build test verbose=1
and dependencies on perl(File::Find::Rule) and perl(Test::Pod) and the tests failed:
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
t/01-basic.t 1 256 12 1 8.33% 11
t/03-multi.t 1 256 7 1 14.29% 4
Failed 2/3 test scripts, 33.33% okay. 2/21 subtests failed, 90.48% okay.
You should investigate why these tests are failing and try to understand the
impact of the failures. I looked at the CPAN testing report and see that other
testers have seen the same test failures.
* 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(MasonX::Request::WithApacheSession) = 0.30
perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession = 0.30-1.fc9
perl >= 0:5.005
perl(Apache::Session::Wrapper) >= 0.13
perl(HTML::Mason) >= 1.16
X %check is not present even though a test suite is in the tarball. You need to
run upstream test suites whenever possible.
* 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.
Yes, you are correct about the %check section. When I was packaging it, I had
problems with the %check section. Just to see if it would build - I temporarily
removed that section and just forgot to add it back. I will add it back and
correct whatever is causing the make test to fail. Thanks.
I have added the %check back into the spec file. In order to be able to build
the package without the tests failing, I had to apply a patch that I found on a
Mason mailing list (http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.mason.devel/1648).
The new urls are:
Hmm, that failed to build for me:
Patch #0 (MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession-0.30_subrequests.patch):
+ patch -s
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Assume -R? [n]
Apply anyway? [n]
1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to file
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.48599 (%prep)
Crap - I am sorry. It was pretty late last night when I was working on this. I
had the patch file messed up. Try the below files. It seems to build ok now
and rpmlint reports no errors.
OK, that builds and the tests pass.
If you look at the test output, you'll see that some tests are skipped because
perl(File::Find::Rule) and perl(Test::Pod) are not installed. We try to get
complete test coverage whenever possible, even if it means additional build-time
I'll go ahead and approve this package, and you can add build dependencies on
those two modules when you check in.
This should conclude the review process; you should now apply for cvsextras
access in the account system and I'll sponsor you. Let me know if you need
assistance with the rest of the process.
Thanks - I will add the dependencies that you mention above.
So, does this mean that all three of my packages are approved? I have not heard
back from the developers regarding the SNMP-Info MIB issue... Also, you said
you will sponsor me? That is great news!! I appreciate your patience and
assistance in reviewing my packages.
If I have questions that come up during the rest of the process I may shoot you
an e-mail (if you do not mind). Thanks again.
Yes, they're all approved, and you should proceed with getting things set up in
the account system. We can work out the MIB issue after the fact.
Feel free to ping me here, via email or in IRC if you need assistance.
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession
Short Description: Integrates Apache::Session into Mason
Branches: F-8 EL-5
Cvsextras Commits: yes
perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession-0.30-4.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession-0.30-6.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
perl-MasonX-Request-WithApacheSession-0.30-6.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.