[Bug 984791] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec-conduit - Consume attoparsec parsers via conduit
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jul 18 03:29:38 UTC 2013
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=984791
Ben Boeckel <mathstuf at gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Ben Boeckel <mathstuf at gmail.com> ---
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
=======
- Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
Note: Archive *.a files found in ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries
===== MUST items =====
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: Using prebuilt rpms.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
Note: Documentation size is 143360 bytes in 17 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
Note: Found : Packager: Ben Boeckel <mathstuf at gmail.com>
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
arched.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ghc-attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel-1.0.1.1-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-1.fc19.src.rpm
ghc-attoparsec-conduit.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) parsers ->
parser, parses, parers
ghc-attoparsec-conduit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US parsers
-> parser, parses, parers
ghc-attoparsec-conduit.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) parsers -> parser,
parses, parers
ghc-attoparsec-conduit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US parsers ->
parser, parses, parers
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Requires
--------
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/bin/sh
ghc(attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-9ebd2aef08bdb0f0a426581bb4950580)
ghc-attoparsec-conduit(x86-64)
ghc-compiler
ghc-devel(attoparsec-0.10.4.0-d9fd97cfc1a1748b3cde35adf7fd233b)
ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
ghc-devel(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
ghc-devel(conduit-1.0.3-ec7ca59ed34ff9b35dbcaf5ab02fcbd0)
ghc-devel(text-0.11.3.1-e38859e86485c167fa7c9441789e7607)
ghc-devel(transformers-0.3.0.0-387c76a892254b0b8fe4d66f4780ad17)
ghc-attoparsec-conduit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
ghc(attoparsec-0.10.4.0-d9fd97cfc1a1748b3cde35adf7fd233b)
ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
ghc(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
ghc(conduit-1.0.3-ec7ca59ed34ff9b35dbcaf5ab02fcbd0)
ghc(text-0.11.3.1-e38859e86485c167fa7c9441789e7607)
ghc(transformers-0.3.0.0-387c76a892254b0b8fe4d66f4780ad17)
libHSarray-0.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSattoparsec-0.10.4.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSbase-4.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSbase-unicode-symbols-0.2.2.4-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSconduit-1.0.3-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHScontainers-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSdeepseq-1.3.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSghc-prim-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSinteger-gmp-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSlifted-base-0.2.1.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSmonad-control-0.3.2.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSmtl-2.1.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSresourcet-0.4.6-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSsemigroups-0.8.5-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHStext-0.11.3.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHStransformers-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHStransformers-base-0.4.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSvoid-0.5.11-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libgmp.so.10()(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
Provides
--------
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel:
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel
ghc-attoparsec-conduit-devel(x86-64)
ghc-devel(attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-9ebd2aef08bdb0f0a426581bb4950580)
ghc-attoparsec-conduit:
ghc(attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-9ebd2aef08bdb0f0a426581bb4950580)
ghc-attoparsec-conduit
ghc-attoparsec-conduit(x86-64)
libHSattoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
Unversioned so-files
--------------------
ghc-attoparsec-conduit:
/usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1/libHSattoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1-ghc7.6.3.so
Source checksums
----------------
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/attoparsec-conduit/1.0.1.1/attoparsec-conduit-1.0.1.1.tar.gz
:
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
006afc8cf16d49daa75e6d707f060530a984f577182eedd5db7a3a208e2acd6c
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
006afc8cf16d49daa75e6d707f060530a984f577182eedd5db7a3a208e2acd6c
Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (b80cd0f) last change: 2013-07-09
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Command line :/home/boeckb/.local/bin/try-fedora-review -n
ghc-attoparsec-conduit --no-build --cache --prebuilt --rpm-spec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9vHwYPSOer&a=cc_unsubscribe
More information about the haskell-devel
mailing list