description An entire ecosystem of CPAN modules exist around the files and formats relating to the CPAN itself. Parsers and object models for various different types of files have been created over the years by various people for various projects. http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Module-Inspector/perl-Module-Inspector.spec http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Module-Inspector/perl-Module-Inspector-1.05-1.fc9.src.rpm
+ GOOD: rpmlint is silent on both source and binary package. + GOOD: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . + GOOD: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. - BAD: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines . * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs there is no email address in %changelog -- all required formats of the changelog record include email address + GOOD: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . + GOOD: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. + GOOD: LICENSE file is in %doc. + GOOD: The spec file is written in American English. + GOOD: The spec file for the package is legible. + GOOD: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. 3c433283d048cc7d4dd005e7db033700 + GOOD: The package successfully compiles and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Given the number of dependencies I have built it only locally on x86_64 + GOOD: noarch, so it compiles everywhere. + GOOD: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. + GOOD: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. No locale support. + GOOD: no libraries + GOOD: not relocatable + GOOD: A package owns all directories that it creates. Follows perl guidelines. + GOOD: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. + GOOD: Permissions on files must be set properly. + GOOD: Each package have a %clean section. + GOOD: Each package consistently use macros. + GOOD: The package contains code, or permissable content. + GOOD: No large documentation files, so no a -doc subpackage. + GOOD: Files registered in %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. + GOOD: No header files. + GOOD: No static libraries. + GOOD: No pkgconfig(.pc) files. + GOOD: The package does not contain library files with a suffix. + GOOD: No devel packages. + GOOD: No .la libtool archives. + GOOD: Packages does not contain GUI applications. + GOOD: Packages does not own files or directories owned by other packages. + GOOD: Runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install + GOOD: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. + SHOULD: Includes license text. Attaching patch for the SPEC file -- when this is applied, APPROVED.
Created attachment 317689 [details] patch fixing spec file
Fixed http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Module-Inspector/perl-Module-Inspector.spec http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Module-Inspector/perl-Module-Inspector-1.05-2.fc9.src.rpm
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: perl-Module-Inspector Short Description: parsers and object models for various files Owners: mmaslano Branches: rawhide InitialCC: fedora-perl-devel-list
cvs done.