haskell-devel February 2009

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
49 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 426754] Review Request: ghc-xmonad-contrib - Third party extensions for xmonad
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=426754 --- Comment #5 from Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond(a)gmail.com> 2009-02-24 21:27:15 EDT --- SPEC: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-xmonad-contrib.spec SRPM: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-xmonad-contrib-0.8.1-2.fc10.src.r… -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 426753] Review Request: xmonad - A tiling window manager
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=426753 --- Comment #18 from Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond(a)gmail.com> 2009-02-24 21:26:34 EDT --- New update SPEC: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/xmonad.spec SRPM: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/xmonad-0.8.1-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 426753] Review Request: xmonad - A tiling window manager
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=426753 lexual <floss(a)lex.hider.name> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |floss(a)lex.hider.name -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=479803 Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)tummy.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)tummy.com> 2009-02-24 16:11:57 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479796] Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=479796 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |petersen(a)redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-02-24 08:14:30 EDT --- Here is the review: +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing MUST Items: [=] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. modulo above rpmlint description error [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. BSD 3 Clause without advertising [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. a8bbb3de67480cfd2e3c4d7ad553a11d /home/petersen/tmp/haskell-src-exts-0.4.8.tar.gz [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [waived for haskell] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. Package is APPROVED for inclusion in Fedora, but consider/take care of the above point/question. Thank you for your patience. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479796] Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=479796 --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-02-24 07:52:43 EDT --- cabal2spec-diff output looks good. You might want to replace %define by %global eventually to keep up with the latest fedora packaging recommendations. (cabal2spec-0.7 does that.) Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1156937 rpmlint output: ghc-haskell-src-exts.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.10.1/haskell-src-exts-0.4.8/libHShaskell-src-exts-0.4.8.a ghc-haskell-src-exts-doc.i386: E: description-line-too-long This package contains development documentation files for the ghc-haskell-src-exts ghc-haskell-src-exts-prof.i386: W: no-documentation ghc-haskell-src-exts-prof.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.10.1/haskell-src-exts-0.4.8/libHShaskell-src-exts-0.4.8_p.a Probably good to fix the error above. cpphs is needed by ghc-haskell-src-exts.i386? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Feb '09

24 Feb '09

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=479803 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-02-24 07:08:26 EDT --- Thanks for the review. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: cabal2spec Short Description: RPM packaging tool for Haskell Cabal Packages Owners: petersen Branches: F-10 F-9 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics library.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Feb '09

23 Feb '09

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=426751 --- Comment #50 from Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond(a)gmail.com> 2009-02-23 20:40:29 EDT --- here's an update to match the latest guidelines proposal, using cabal2spec 0.7 SRPM: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-X11-1.4.5-2.fc10.src.rpm SPEC: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-X11.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Feb '09

23 Feb '09

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=479803 Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> 2009-02-23 04:11:34 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i386). koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1145408 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url d2586c3c99e2ae06c8721409cf440343 cabal2spec-0.7.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI App. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel February 2009