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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Mathieu Bridon bochecha@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |738931

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Remi Collet fedora@famillecollet.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora@famillecollet.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |fedora@famillecollet.com Flag| |fedora-review?

--- Comment #3 from Remi Collet fedora@famillecollet.com 2011-09-17 04:21:11 EDT --- === FORMAL REVIEW === -=N/A x=Check !=Problem, ?=Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Rpmlint output: perl-Socket-Netlink.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/perl-Socket-Netlink-0.03/LICENSE [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: GPL+ or Artistic [x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. md5sum : b5898a207023ff5b94b06cb5857395f0 Socket-Netlink-0.03.tar.gz [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested on: f15, i386 + x86_64 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x] The spec file handles locales properly. [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Packages don't bundle copies of system librarie [x] Package is not relocatable. [!] Package must own all directories that it creates. [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [!] Package consistently uses macros. [x] Package contains code, or permissable content. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present. [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages with %{?_isa}, if present. [-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI [-] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8 [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.

=== SUGGESTED ITEMS === [x] Final requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) perl(Sub::Name) perl(base) perl(Carp) perl(constant) perl(Exporter) perl(IO::Socket) perl(IO::Socket::Netlink) perl(IO::Socket::Netlink::_Message) perl(overload) perl(Socket) perl(Socket::Netlink) perl(Socket::Netlink::Generic) perl(Socket::Netlink::Generic_const) perl(strict) perl(Sub::Name) perl(warnings) [x] Final provides perl(Socket::Netlink::Generic_const) = 0.03 perl(IO::Socket::Netlink) = 0.03 perl(IO::Socket::Netlink::_ErrorMessage) perl(IO::Socket::Netlink::Generic) = 0.03 perl(IO::Socket::Netlink::Generic::_Message) perl(IO::Socket::Netlink::_Message) perl(Socket::Netlink) = 0.03 perl(Socket::Netlink::Generic) = 0.03 perl-Socket-Netlink = 0.03-2.fc15.remi perl-Socket-Netlink(x86-64) = 0.03-2.fc15.remi [x] Latest version is packaged. [-] If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [-] The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [-] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: N/A (missing BR, not yet approved) Tested on: mock f15 i386 [x] The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested on: mock f15 i386 + rpmbuild f15 x86_64 [x] Package functions as described. [-] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [-] If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [x] your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct. [x] %check is present and the tests pass

MUST: - file /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto is not owned by any package (should probably be owned by perl-libs itself...) - issue with %optimize not defined (%optflags ?)

Should: - for incorrect-fsf-address, please, add bug link in your spec

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Remi Collet fedora@famillecollet.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+

--- Comment #5 from Remi Collet fedora@famillecollet.com 2011-09-19 11:42:41 EDT --- All MUST fixed

======== APPROVED ========

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Mathieu Bridon bochecha@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-09-20 00:29:38 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |psabata@redhat.com Flag| |needinfo?(bochecha@fedorapr | |oject.org)

--- Comment #8 from Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com 2012-01-05 10:37:39 EST --- Anything happening in here? Have you built the package? Can this bug be closed?

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

--- Comment #10 from Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com 2012-01-06 02:14:45 EST --- I was just curious since the review seemed dead; thanks for the explanation :)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED CC| |james.hogarth@gmail.com Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2015-12-03 22:06:49

--- Comment #12 from James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com --- This package is in rawhide.

Closing this bug in an effort to tidy the review queue.

If there are outstanding issues with the package please open an appropriate bug against the package itself.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738589

Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ON_QA Resolution|RAWHIDE |--- Keywords| |Reopened

--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Socket-Netlink-0.04-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-5300747e76