haskell-devel February 2009

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
49 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 13 Feb '09

13 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=471003 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-02-12 23:11:47 EDT --- Thanks, Bryan, for reviewing. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: cabal-install Short Description: Haskell package (hackage) tool Owners: petersen Branches: F-10 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 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Feb '09

12 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=471003 Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> 2009-02-12 01:56:07 EDT --- Here's my review. # MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. srpm is clean, binary rpm reports these: cabal-install.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bash_completion.d/cabal cabal-install.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/bin/cabal These are both acceptable. # MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK. # MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK. # MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. OK. # MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license [...] BSD3 == OK. # MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match [...] OK. # MUST: license(s) in %doc. OK. # MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. OK. # MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. OK. # MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream [...] OK. # MUST: successfully compile and build [...] OK. # MUST: architectures in ExcludeArch. OK. # MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [...] OK. # MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK. # MUST: shared library ldconfig NA. # MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable [...] NA. # MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. OK. # MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. OK. # MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK. # MUST: Each package must have a %clean section [...] OK. # MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. OK. # MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. OK. # MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. NA. # MUST: %doc must not affect runtime OK. # MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. NA. # MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. Exempt. # MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files [...] NA. # MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix [...] NA. # MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages [...] NA. # MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives [...] NA. # MUST: Packages containing GUI applications [...] NA. # MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned [...] NA. # MUST: %install rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). OK. # MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. OK. # SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text [...] NA. # SHOULD: description and summary translations No. # SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. OK. # SHOULD: binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested x86_64 and i386. # SHOULD: functions as described OK. # SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. OK. # SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel [...] NA. # SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files [...] NA. # SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of [...] This package is 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

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Feb '09

12 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=471003 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |cabal-install Flag|needinfo?(petersen(a)redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2009-02-11 20:39:31 EDT --- The .spec file in comment 6 does not use %cabal_build: you trying another older package perhaps? -- 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] Packages blocked on review
by Bryan O'Sullivan 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

Hi, Yaakov - You submitted a bunch of packages for review late last year, but have not responded to any requests for further info on any of them, so they're all essentially dead in the water. What do we do about this? I have a little bit of bandwidth to review packages at the moment, but I don't want to waste my time on defunct requests that haven't been closed out. Thanks, B.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Feb '09

11 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=471003 --- Comment #8 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> 2009-02-11 14:09:35 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=331608) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331608) Log of failed build attempt Failed build. -- 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 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Feb '09

11 Feb '09

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Feb '09

11 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 --- Comment #10 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> 2009-02-11 06:12:58 EDT --- you should have %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/rpmdevtools like we have in rpmdevtools -- 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] #fedora-haskell
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 10 Feb '09

10 Feb '09

Hi There is a #fedora-haskell irc channel on Freenode which provides a quiet place for discussion of Fedora Haskell topics. (#haskell and #fedora-devel are great but too busy to ping people and slow conversations.:) Please drop in when you are on IRC. Jens ps I hope the activity of the SIG will soon pickup again: all the package reviews seem to have stalled. :-/ I will look at ghc-haskell-src-exts which is ready and help with others as best I can. A new cabal2spec should be available soon which generates and updates spec files, which will make cabal packaging even more (too much?) of a "breeze". :-) I requested a fedorahosted project for it too.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel February 2009