[Bug 187314] Review Request: perl-Data-HexDump

[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-Data-HexDump


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187314


paul at city-fan.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |paul at city-fan.org
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org  2006-03-30 06:40 EST -------
Review:

- rpmlint clean
- package and spec naming OK
- package meets guidelines
- license is same as perl, matches spec
- spec file written in English and is legible
- sources match upstream
- package builds OK on FC5 (i386) and in mock for rawhide (i386)
- BR's OK
- no locales, libraries, subpackages, or pkgconfigs to worry about
- not relocatable
- no directory ownership or permissions problems
- no completely duplicate files
- %clean section present and correct
- code, not context
- no large docs
- docs don't affect runtime
- no desktop file needed
- hexdump.pl appears to function correctly
- no scriptlets

Needswork:

- macro usage inconsistent:
  use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot} but not both in the same spec

Suggestions:

- It is not necessary to generate and ship the COPYING and Artistic license
  texts; inclusion of license texts is only mandatory when upstream provide
  them.

- Inclusion of hexdump as %doc is redundant since it's basically the same thing
  as %{_bindir}/hexdump.pl


-- 
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.