[Bug 206985] Review Request: perl-Device-SerialPort

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: perl-Device-SerialPort


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206985





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-09-19 22:50 EST -------
After the above fix, everything builds fine.  rpmlint says:

W: perl-Device-SerialPort make-check-outside-check-section #make test
   This is bogus, but if you remove the commenting from the %check line it goes
away.  Fix it if you like.

The license should be "GPL or Artistic"; that's the usual way to indicate the
oft-seen "same as perl" terms.

* source files match upstream:
   aeef199bfdd2aece043649a0673146d5  Device-SerialPort-1.002.tar.gz
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
X license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none)
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint has only bogus complaints
* final provides and requires are sane:
   SerialPort.so()(64bit)
   perl(Device::SerialPort) = 1.002
   perl-Device-SerialPort = 1.002-1.fc6
  =
   /usr/bin/perl
   perl >= 0:5.006
   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8)
   perl(Carp)
   perl(Device::SerialPort)
   perl(Exporter)
   perl(IO::Handle)
   perl(POSIX)
   perl(XSLoader)
   perl(strict)
   perl(vars)
   perl(warnings)
* %check is necessarily disabled.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.