[Bug 242651] Review Request: perl-Mail-Audit - something flexible to filter mail using Perl tests.

[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-Mail-Audit -  something flexible to filter mail using Perl tests.
Alias: perl-Mail-Audit

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=242651





------- Additional Comments From rjones at redhat.com  2008-04-04 07:32 EST -------
- rpmlint output

  perl-Mail-Audit.noarch: W: manifest-in-perl-module
/usr/share/doc/perl-Mail-Audit-2.222/MANIFEST
  This perl module package contains a MANIFEST or a MANIFEST.SKIP file
  in the documentation directory.

  perl-Mail-Audit.noarch: E: useless-explicit-provides perl(Mail::Audit)
  This package provides 2 times the same capacity. It should only provide it
  once.

Please fix both of these.

+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture (i386)
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
- %defattr line

The %defattr line seems to be wrong.  I think it should be:
  %defattr(-,root,root,-)

+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8

Optional:

n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available
(not done) reviewer should build the package in mock
(not done) the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
(ran tests) review should test the package functions as described
n/a scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin

---

OK, a few things to be fixed there, but nothing major wrong with the
package.

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