Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Review Request: perl-Mail-ClamAV - Perl extension for the clamav virus scanner|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Steven Pritchard <steve>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Jason Tibbitts <tibbs>|
|Status:||CLOSED NOTABUG||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||cweyl, fedora-package-review, johan-fedora, notting|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-10-23 17:43:12 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
|Bug Blocks:||201449, 454442, 456144|
Description Steven Pritchard 2008-07-09 14:28:56 EDT
Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Mail-ClamAV/perl-Mail-ClamAV.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Mail-ClamAV-0.22-1.src.rpm Description: Clam AntiVirus is an anti-virus toolkit for UNIX http://www.clamav.com/. This module provide a simple interface to its C API.
Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2008-08-10 16:18:51 EDT
This is standard Perl module, but a couple of things bother me. If you visit the upstream URL, you can't see version 0.22, just 0.13. If you search for ClamAV on CPAN you'll see a link to 0.22, but clicking there gets you a page with a big red "UNAUTHORIZED" warning. What's that about? When running the tests, I see the following: (in cleanup) panic: free from wrong pool. which is kind of troubling. I see no problems with the packaging, but I'm reluctant to approve this without some discussion of those two issues. * source files match upstream: 1927671296cd398a1b0ce3102683ed23e78648fc9dd643a8fab92d18e33b010b Mail-ClamAV-0.22.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: ClamAV.so()(64bit) perl(Mail::ClamAV) = 0.22 perl(Mail::ClamAV::Status) perl-Mail-ClamAV = 0.22-1.fc10 perl-Mail-ClamAV(x86-64) = 0.22-1.fc10 = libclamav.so.4()(64bit) libclamav.so.4(CLAMAV_PUBLIC)(64bit) perl >= 0:5.006001 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Carp) perl(Class::Struct) perl(Exporter) perl(IO::Handle) perl(Inline) perl(Inline) >= 0.44 perl(strict) perl(warnings) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=10, 2 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.00 sys + 1.58 cusr 0.12 csys = 1.71 CPU) (discounting the weird panic at the end) * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files.
Comment 2 Jason Tibbitts 2008-10-01 12:13:33 EDT
Any response to my review commentary?
Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2008-10-23 17:43:12 EDT
Well, its been three more weeks. I guess I'll close this.