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=759757 Petr Pisar <ppi...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar <ppi...@redhat.com> 2012-01-06 04:19:39 EST --- SPEC file changes: --- perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.spec 2011-11-29 11:16:42.000000000 +0100 +++ perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.spec.1 2012-01-05 17:19:24.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ Name: perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII Version: 0.03 -Release: 1%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: EucJP-ascii - An eucJP-open mapping License: GPL+ or Artistic Group: Development/Libraries @@ -10,6 +10,12 @@ BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod) +BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode) +BuildRequires: perl(XSLoader) +BuildRequires: perl(base) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode::CJKConstants) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode::JP::JIS7) Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo $version)) %{?perl_default_filter} @@ -22,17 +28,16 @@ %setup -q -n Encode-EUCJPASCII-%{version} %build -%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor +%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" make %{?_smp_mflags} %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - -make pure_install PERL_INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT - -find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \; -find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2>/dev/null \; - +make pure_install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT +find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} ';' +# Remove the next line from noarch packages (unneeded) +find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.bs' -a -size 0 -exec rm -f {} ';' +find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2>/dev/null ';' %{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/* %check @@ -45,7 +50,12 @@ %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc Changes README %{perl_vendorarch}/* +%exclude %dir %{perl_vendorarch}/auto/ %changelog +* Thu Jan 05 2012 Xavier Bachelot <xav...@bachelot.org> 0.03-2 +- Follow the rpmdevtools perl spec template to fix packaging bugs. +- Add missing BuildRequires. + * Tue Nov 29 2011 Xavier Bachelot <xav...@bachelot.org> 0.03-1 - Initial Fedora release. > > TODO: Remove useless BuildRoot definition, it's cleaning in %install > > section, and whole %clean section. They are not needed anymore. > > TODO: Remove useless %defattr from %files section. > Needed for EPEL5, so I'd rather keep them. Ok. > > TODO: Build-require perl(Encode) for tests (EUCJPASCII.pm:6) > > TODO: Build-require perl(XSLoader) for tests (EUCJPASCII.pm:7) > > TODO: Build-require perl(base) for tests (EUCJPASCII.pm:18) > > TODO: Build-require perl(Encode::CJKConstants) for tests (EUCJPASCII.pm:23) > > TODO: Build-require perl(Encode::JP::JIS7) for tests (EUCJPASCII.pm:23) > > > Added. > > FIX: Build-require perl(File::Spec) (Makefile.PL:18) > Added. +BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode) +BuildRequires: perl(XSLoader) +BuildRequires: perl(base) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode::CJKConstants) +BuildRequires: perl(Encode::JP::JIS7) Ok. > > FIX: Remove empty *.bs files. (These empty bootstrap files for DynaLoader > > are > > useless.) > Done. The spec is now following more closely the perl spec template, while the > previous version was generated with cpanspec. +find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.bs' -a -size 0 -exec rm -f {} ';' Ok. > I've compared the build log from both the older spec and the newer with the > BuildRequires added, but I don't see a difference, so I'm a bit puzzled... Are > the BRs really needed ? The Perl modules are used directly by this code, so you need to build-require them directly too. You cannot assume a module keeps in the the same RPM package forever (e.g. the Encode is currently part of perl, but If someone decides to sub-package it into perl-Encode or even dual-live it as packe sourced from CPAN, this will not be true anymore) or a module keeps available through indirect dependency (like File::Spec packaged as perl-PathTools). $ rpmlint perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.spec ../SRPMS/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-0.03-2.fc17.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-* perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eucJP -> eggcup, equip, uncap perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eucJP -> eggcup, equip, uncap perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ascii -> ASCII, ASCIIs, As perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eucJP -> eggcup, equip, uncap perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eucJP -> eggcup, equip, uncap perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ascii -> ASCII, ASCIIs, As 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-0.03-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jan 6 09:57 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Encode -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5662 Oct 19 2009 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/Encode/EUCJPASCII.pm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jan 6 09:57 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/Encode drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jan 6 09:57 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/Encode/EUCJPASCII -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 759824 Jan 6 09:57 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/Encode/EUCJPASCII/EUCJPASCII.so drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jan 6 09:57 /usr/share/doc/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-0.03 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 569 Oct 19 2009 /usr/share/doc/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-0.03/Changes -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 496 Oct 19 2009 /usr/share/doc/perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII-0.03/README File permissions and layout is Ok. Package builds in F17 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3624174). Ok. Resolution: Package APPROVED. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review