Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493250 Mamoru Tasaka <mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> 2009-04-01 14:34:35 EDT --- Well, ! You can base your spec file on what is created from cpanspec (in cpanspec rpm): https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Perl/cpanspec Then some notes: - The license tag "GPL" is invalid https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#GPL_and_LGPL (looks like "GPL+ or Artistic" for this package) - Your package does not build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1270974 At least BR: perl(ExtUtils::Depends) is needed - I doubt explicit "Requires: gtk2, glib, cairo" are needed. Such library related dependencies are automatically checked by rpmbuild itself and automatically added to binary rpms. Also I guess "Requires: perl-Gtk2" is also automatically checked by rpmbuild. - Please make the sentence in %description devided into several lines. Fedora suggests one line should not contain more than 79 characters. - Please add dome documents as %doc. - The directory %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/ should not be owned by this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
