[Bug 233424] Review Request: perl-mecab - Perl binding for MeCab

[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-mecab - Perl binding for MeCab


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233424





------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2007-05-08 14:11 EST -------
Thank you for initial comment!

Updated:
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/perl-mecab.spec
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/perl-mecab-0.95-4.fc7.src.rpm
----------------------------------------------
* Wed May  9 2007 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.95-4
- Correctly require version specified BuildRequires
- Rewrite accroding to perl template
----------------------------------------------
I named this package as "mecab-perl" initially, so at first
I didn't use perl template...

(In reply to comment #5)
> The following is not useful:
> export CXXFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
Absolutely......

> If you use (like in the template) pure_install instead of install
> you won't need to remove $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{perl_archlib}/perllocal.pod
This time I borrowed many ideas from perl template.

> I think that the 
> Requires:       mecab = %{version}
> is not usefull, the soname dependency is enough. Otherwise the
> devel BuildRequires should also be versionned.
Well, I thought that I required version specific BuildRequires
(like python-mecab, etc..). Now requiring version

> chmod -R u+w $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*
Thanks.

> I would personally not use -f for rm and mv to have build breaking
> when things change.
Well, this is a sort of my habit to use "-f" because I saw
on some cases that "-f" is really required (one example is
bug 225791). 
And.. while I don't know the reason, for directories
recursive delete by "rm -r" occasionally hangs up when not
using "-f" (would you know why?)

> I also don't like the use of %relnumber and %mainver in my
> opinion the clutter the spec unnecessarily.
This is also my habit.. 

> Regarding the license 
This was discussed on bug 233423


-- 
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.