Bug 557686 - Review Request: perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX - Pod::PseudoPod::LaTeX Perl module
Summary: Review Request: perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX - Pod::PseudoPod::LaTeX Perl module
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Emmanuel Seyman
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-01-22 08:35 UTC by Gerd Pokorra
Modified: 2010-02-05 01:50 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 1.000-2.fc12
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-02-05 01:50:50 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
emmanuel: fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Gerd Pokorra 2010-01-22 08:35:06 UTC
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX.spec

SRPM URL: 
ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-1.fc12.src.rpm

Description:
This module is a Pod::PseudoPod subclass, itself a Pod::Simple subclass. This means that this is a full-fledged POD parser. It is usefull for book manuscripts.

rpmlint reports no errors or warnings.

Scratch build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1937764

It should be easy to review.

Comment 1 Ralf Corsepius 2010-01-22 11:16:08 UTC
MUSTFIX:

* Package must own
- /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Pod
- /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Pod/PseudoPod

Proposal: Add this to %files
%{perl_vendorlib}/*

* Please remove this:
BuildRequires:  perl >= 1:v5.6.2

Comment 2 Gerd Pokorra 2010-01-22 13:12:35 UTC
The directory  '%{perl_vendorlib}/Pod/PseudoPod'
is owned by the package: perl-Pod-PseudoPod-0.15-1.fc12.noarch

> rpm -qf /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Pod/PseudoPod
perl-Pod-PseudoPod-0.15-1.fc12.noarch

So I think this package should not also own the directory PseudoPod.

The perl BuildRequires is removed.

The spec file under the URL is update:
ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX.spec

SRPM URL: 
ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-2.fc12.src.rpm

Scratch build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1938247

Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2010-01-22 13:34:25 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> The directory  '%{perl_vendorlib}/Pod/PseudoPod'
> is owned by the package: perl-Pod-PseudoPod-0.15-1.fc12.noarch
Irrelevant - The perl packaging rules mandate all perl modules to own all
directories below %{perl_vendorlib}

Comment 4 Gerd Pokorra 2010-01-22 15:09:01 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Irrelevant - The perl packaging rules mandate all perl modules to own all
> directories below %{perl_vendorlib}    

You are right! I looked in the documentation and saw it at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl#Directory_Ownership

So I changed it in the spec file to your suggestion:
%{perl_vendorlib}/*

I do not increment the release number but the files at the URLs are updated and I made a new scratch build.

Spec URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX.spec

SRPM URL: 
ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-2.fc12.src.rpm

Scratch build URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1938830

Comment 5 Emmanuel Seyman 2010-01-30 18:39:08 UTC
Taking.

Comment 6 Emmanuel Seyman 2010-01-30 19:18:58 UTC
 - = 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 including the Perl specific items
 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested on:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1953577

 [x] Rpmlint output:
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

 [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
 [-] 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.
 [-] 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.
1009516b6281538960fae00b4e0ac363  Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000.tar.gz
 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
 [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [ ] 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 -fR $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.
 [-] 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.
 [-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [-] 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.
 [x] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.

Nitpick: the package's description doesn't adequately describe it.

 [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
     Tested on: f12.x86_64
 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on: f12.x86_64
 [?] Package functions as described.
 [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
 [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
 [-] File based requires are sane.
 [x] %check is present and the tests pass

All tests successful.
Files=5, Tests=54,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.02 sys +  0.23 cusr  0.03 csys =  0.32 CPU)
Result: PASS

APPROVED.

Comment 7 Gerd Pokorra 2010-02-01 12:01:20 UTC
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-Pod-PseudoPod
Short Description: Pod::PseudoPod::LaTeX Perl module
Owners: gerd
Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5
InitialCC: gerd

Comment 8 Kevin Fenzi 2010-02-01 22:55:20 UTC
The Name doesn't look right in the cvs request. Can you confirm and resubmit?

Comment 9 Gerd Pokorra 2010-02-02 00:14:07 UTC
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX
Short Description: Pod::PseudoPod::LaTeX Perl module
Owners: gerd
Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5
InitialCC: gerd

Comment 10 Kevin Fenzi 2010-02-03 04:14:52 UTC
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2010-02-03 12:46:35 UTC
perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-2.fc12

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2010-02-05 01:50:45 UTC
perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX-1.000-2.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.