https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823166
Petr Pisar <ppi...@redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar <ppi...@redhat.com> ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-B-Hooks-OP-Check-EntersubForCV.spec.old 2012-05-19
18:10:35.000000000 +0200
+++ perl-B-Hooks-OP-Check-EntersubForCV.spec 2012-06-03 19:14:51.000000000
+0200
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-B-Hooks-OP-Check-EntersubForCV
Version: 0.09
-Release: 1%{?dist}
+Release: 2%{?dist}
Summary: Invoke callbacks on construction of entersub OPs for certain
CVs
License: GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -9,10 +9,13 @@
BuildRequires: perl(B::Hooks::OP::Check) >= 0.19
BuildRequires: perl(B::Utils) >= 0.19
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::Depends)
-BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
+BuildRequires: perl(inc::Module::Install)
+BuildRequires: perl(Module::Install::ExtraTests)
BuildRequires: perl(parent)
BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo
$version))
%{?perl_default_filter}
@@ -45,5 +48,8 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Sat May 26 2012 Iain Arnell <iarn...@gmail.com> 0.09-2
+- BuildRequire inc::Module::Install, not EU::MM
+
* Fri Apr 20 2012 Iain Arnell <iarn...@gmail.com> 0.09-1
- Specfile autogenerated by cpanspec 1.79.
> FIX: Build-require `perl(inc::Module::Install)' (Makefile.PL:3).
-BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
+BuildRequires: perl(inc::Module::Install)
Ok.
> > FIX: Build-require Perl modules needed by bundled inc/* files (e.g.
> > `perl(Cwd)')
> > or, which I recommend, remove the inc content (be ware of inc/.author to
> > skip
> > author tests). Then you do not need to build-require
> > perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker).
> Updated to BuildRequire perl(inc::Module::Install) - purely to get the
> build-time
> dependencies right. I've not removed the inc/ content itself as that's what
> Module::Install is supposed to be using for installation.
How can you be sure the Fedora and the inc files have the same set of
dependencies? This is exactly the transitive dependency with unspecified direct
dependencies I don't like. It's much better then before, but still I don't feel
safe. If we agree we have to specify dependencies, I cannot see a reason why
inc/ code should be an exception.
Package builds in F18
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4125035). Ok.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.
--
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
