haskell-devel September 2014

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
329 discussions

[Bug 1135906] Review Request: ghc-http-date - HTTP Date parser and formatter
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135906 Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |relrod(a)redhat.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |relrod(a)redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> --- APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [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 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. [x]: 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. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 153600 bytes in 21 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [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 Haskell: [x]: This should never happen ...but it did. ;) ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: 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. [-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-http-date-devel-0.0.4-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-http-date-0.0.4-1.fc20.src.rpm ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter ghc-http-date.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter ghc-http-date.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ghc-http-date-devel ghc-http-date ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter ghc-http-date.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US formatter -> formatted, for matter, for-matter 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ghc-http-date-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ghc(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358) ghc-compiler ghc-devel(array-0.4.0.1-3b78425c10ff2dad7acf7e8c8ae014c3) 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-http-date(x86-64) ghc-http-date (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ghc(array-0.4.0.1-3b78425c10ff2dad7acf7e8c8ae014c3) ghc(attoparsec-0.10.4.0-d9fd97cfc1a1748b3cde35adf7fd233b) ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f) 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) libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-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) libHStext-0.11.3.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- ghc-http-date-devel: ghc-devel(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358) ghc-http-date-devel ghc-http-date-devel(x86-64) ghc-http-date-static ghc-http-date: ghc(http-date-0.0.4-1da1f7af7d270b1921bf514935313358) ghc-http-date ghc-http-date(x86-64) libHShttp-date-0.0.4-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) Unversioned so-files -------------------- ghc-http-date: /usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/http-date-0.0.4/libHShttp-date-0.0.4-ghc7.6.3.so Source checksums ---------------- http://hackage.haskell.org/package/http-date-0.0.4/http-date-0.0.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 25228b2456b319c7c777ea3673f441ddf68881da176b37c51feab2108d0175dd CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 25228b2456b319c7c777ea3673f441ddf68881da176b37c51feab2108d0175dd Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1135906 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG -- 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=Ky19BHeBG3&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1140914] Review Request: ghc-conduit-extra - Conduit adapters for common libraries
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1140914 --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- http://packdeps.haskellers.com/reverse/conduit-extra -- 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=NxgnIf577w&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1140914] Review Request: ghc-conduit-extra - Conduit adapters for common libraries
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1140914 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |haskell-devel(a)lists.fedorap | |roject.org Whiteboard| |Ready --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- 1.0 is a dummy placeholder package before conduit-extra-1.1. Plan to move to 1.1 together with conduit-1.1. The package will later replace *-conduit. -- 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=pzQpA85F1X&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1135933] Review Request: ghc-monads-tf - Monad classes using type families
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Sep '14

11 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135933 --- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- oops - corrected request: New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-monads-tf Short Description: Monad classes using type families Upstream URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/monads-tf Owners: petersen codeblock Branches: f21 f20 f19 epel7 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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=AYRyIagTKg&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1135933] Review Request: ghc-monads-tf - Monad classes using type families
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Sep '14

11 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135933 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Whiteboard|ready | Flags| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- Thank you for the review, Ricky New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-monads-tf Short Description: Monad classes using type families Upstream URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/monads-tf Owners: petersen relrod Branches: f21 f20 f19 epel7 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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=Vyacbm6Mp9&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1135933] Review Request: ghc-monads-tf - Monad classes using type families
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Sep '14

11 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135933 Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |relrod(a)redhat.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |relrod(a)redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> --- Looks good to me. APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [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. [x]: 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. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 962560 bytes in 100 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [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 Haskell: [x]: This should never happen ...and yet it did. ;) ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: 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. [-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1064960 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ghc-monads-tf-0.1.0.2-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-monads-tf-devel-0.1.0.2-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-monads-tf-0.1.0.2-1.fc20.src.rpm ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US monad -> nomad, gonad, Mona ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cecs -> ceca, secs, pecs ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pdx -> pd, pix, pox ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US edu -> ed, educ, due ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mpj -> mph, mp, mpg ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US springschool -> spring school, spring-school, schooling ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml, ht-ml ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US monad -> nomad, gonad, Mona ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cecs -> ceca, secs, pecs ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pdx -> pd, pix, pox ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US edu -> ed, educ, due ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mpj -> mph, mp, mpg ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US springschool -> spring school, spring-school, schooling ghc-monads-tf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml, ht-ml 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 20 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ghc-monads-tf ghc-monads-tf-devel ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Monad -> Mona, Gonad, Mon ad ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US monad -> nomad, gonad, Mona ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cecs -> ceca, secs, pecs ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pdx -> pd, pix, pox ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US edu -> ed, educ, due ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mpj -> mph, mp, mpg ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US springschool -> spring school, spring-school, schooling ghc-monads-tf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml, ht-ml 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ghc-monads-tf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc(transformers-0.3.0.0-387c76a892254b0b8fe4d66f4780ad17) libHSbase-4.6.0.1-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) libHStransformers-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ghc-monads-tf-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ghc(monads-tf-0.1.0.2-c0798c2f7ab3332e792bf77830121501) ghc-compiler ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc-devel(transformers-0.3.0.0-387c76a892254b0b8fe4d66f4780ad17) ghc-monads-tf(x86-64) Provides -------- ghc-monads-tf: ghc(monads-tf-0.1.0.2-c0798c2f7ab3332e792bf77830121501) ghc-monads-tf ghc-monads-tf(x86-64) libHSmonads-tf-0.1.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) ghc-monads-tf-devel: ghc-devel(monads-tf-0.1.0.2-c0798c2f7ab3332e792bf77830121501) ghc-monads-tf-devel ghc-monads-tf-devel(x86-64) ghc-monads-tf-static Unversioned so-files -------------------- ghc-monads-tf: /usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/monads-tf-0.1.0.2/libHSmonads-tf-0.1.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so Source checksums ---------------- http://hackage.haskell.org/package/monads-tf-0.1.0.2/monads-tf-0.1.0.2.tar.… : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : cb6f495443f526b00b3d06535aa29e393473244acd410cba1b898eeaa8f8077c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : cb6f495443f526b00b3d06535aa29e393473244acd410cba1b898eeaa8f8077c Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1135933 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG -- 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=v4kSoC9UXS&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1139050] New: git-annex-debuginfo-5.20140717-3.fc22 is empty
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 Sep '14

08 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1139050 Bug ID: 1139050 Summary: git-annex-debuginfo-5.20140717-3.fc22 is empty Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: git-annex Keywords: Regression Assignee: mathstuf(a)gmail.com Reporter: ville.skytta(a)iki.fi QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: haskell-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mathstuf(a)gmail.com Blocks: 496968 (DebugInfo) git-annex-debuginfo-5.20140717-3.fc22 is empty. Looks like that for some reason, previously there wasn't -debuginfo at all. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496968 [Bug 496968] Tracking bug for packages with debuginfo problems -- 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=JCeMY5Lg4J&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 3

[Bug 992364] New: ghc-hakyll: FTBFS in rawhide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '14

05 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=992364 Bug ID: 992364 Summary: ghc-hakyll: FTBFS in rawhide Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: ghc-hakyll Assignee: petersen(a)redhat.com Reporter: dennis(a)ausil.us QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: haskell-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com Blocks: 991858 Your package ghc-hakyll failed to build from source in current rawhide. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5719823 Build logs: root.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/9823/5719823/root.log build.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/9823/5719823/build.log state.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/9823/5719823/state.log NOTE: build logs are cleaned up after 1 week For details on mass rebuild see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Mass_Rebuild -- 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=E2YgiRxGTu&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 10

[Bug 992430] New: pandoc: FTBFS in rawhide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '14

05 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=992430 Bug ID: 992430 Summary: pandoc: FTBFS in rawhide Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: pandoc Assignee: petersen(a)redhat.com Reporter: dennis(a)ausil.us QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: haskell-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com Blocks: 991858 Your package pandoc failed to build from source in current rawhide. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5724879 Build logs: root.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/4879/5724879/root.log build.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/4879/5724879/build.log state.log: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/4879/5724879/state.log NOTE: build logs are cleaned up after 1 week For details on mass rebuild see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Mass_Rebuild -- 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=FtuPCwBG9g&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 25

[Bug 1100410] New: ghc-dbus-0.10.8 is available
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Sep '14

03 Sep '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1100410 Bug ID: 1100410 Summary: ghc-dbus-0.10.8 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: ghc-dbus Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: dcallagh(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: dcallagh(a)redhat.com, haskell-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Latest upstream release: 0.10.8 Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 0.10.7-1.fc21 URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/dbus Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring -- 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=vRiX2FlNJt&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 3

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel September 2014