[Bug 192577] Review Request: perl-OpenFrame
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat May 27 20:36:08 UTC 2006
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-OpenFrame
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192577
------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-05-27 16:28 EST -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> Only one of the files (lib/OpenFrame/Argument/Blob.pm) seems to have a statement
> of the license. I don't think that's enough to suggest the license for the
> entire package.
I've emailed the author (the one listed in that file anyway) for clarification.
> I wonder about the need for these:
>
> Requires: perl(File::Type) >= 0.01
> Requires: perl(HTTP::Request) >= 0.01
> Requires: perl(IO::Null) >= 0.01
>
> The versions are so low that they seem to have been put in as placeholders. RPM
> should figure out all of these on its own. (It doesn't find HTTP::Request but
> it does find other modules, all provided by perl-libwww-perl.)
Fixed in -2.
>
t/02http_request....[OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::OpenFrame::Segment::HTTP::Response::dispatch]
> no response available
> at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Pipeline/Dispatch.pm line 74
> ok
[...]
> I'm not sure if the first is a mock artifact or a problem with the test suite.
It happens when I'm not running under mock either.
> t/98compile.........skipped
> all skipped: - do not have File::Find::Rule installed
[...]
> The second is fixed up with the obvious BR:.
Also fixed in -2.
http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-OpenFrame-3.05-2.src.rpm
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list