haskell-devel September 2010

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
456 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 615700] Review Request: ghc-gtksourceview2 - Haskell gtksourceview2 binding
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=615700 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |ghc-gtksourceview2 -- 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 629551] Review Request: ghc-gio - Haskell binding to glib's gio
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=629551 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |ghc-gio -- 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 614024] Review Request: ghc-pango - Haskell pango binding
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=614024 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |ghc-pango -- 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 615692] Review Request: ghc-gtk - Haskell gtk binding
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=615692 --- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2010-09-22 03:49:20 EDT --- Thanks for checking the package: please apply for packager status so I can sponsor you before approving any packages. (In reply to comment #9) > Will the updated glib package (v0.11.2) and gtk2hs-buildtools be in Fedora 14? New gtk2hs-buildtools is already in the f14 testing repo: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=gtk2hs-buildtools Yes I will update ghc-glib for f14 now that gtk is ready thanks for the reminder. > Is it ok if Build requires does not require any particular version (or above)? > In this case, gtk-0.11.2 won't build without glib-0.11.2. Well we could include it but often it becomes more of a maintainence burden in the long term. > The executable stack warning on the shared library has gone away. Interesting -- 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 629145] Review Request: ghc-cmdargs - Haskell command argument parsing
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=629145 --- Comment #12 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> 2010-09-22 03:06:50 EDT --- > > - static libraries should be in -static > > There is a .a file contained but its not clear from the haskell package > > guidelines regarding this > > Agreed this is unfortunate but currently ghc assumes and requires > the presence of the static library so they can't be subpackaged yet. > I hope this will change in the future. (Actually ghc's shared > library support is still considered somewhat experimental > but seems to work well - I don't know if any other distro which > has actually adopted them yet though.) The Haskell Guidelines > should state this clearly, though they were written but ghc-6.12 > which introduced shared lib support on linux. So there's an agreed exception here with the packaging committee? There's only that and the rpmlint errors blocking this. -- 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 615692] Review Request: ghc-gtk - Haskell gtk binding
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 615692] Review Request: ghc-gtk - Haskell gtk binding
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

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=615692 --- Comment #8 from Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> 2010-09-22 02:21:23 EDT --- Ok.Thanks. I have run rpmlint on the rpms got from the link. Here is my review of the package [+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. ghc-gtk.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. ghc-gtk.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. ghc-gtk-devel.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. ghc-gtk-prof.i686: E: devel-dependency ghc-gtk-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-gtk-prof.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-gtk-prof.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.3/gtk-0.11.2/libHSgtk-0.11.2_p.a A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. [+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec [+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. Naming-Yes Version-release - Matches License - OK No prebuilt external bits - OK Spec legibity - OK Package template - OK Arch support - OK Libexecdir - OK rpmlint - yes changelogs - OK Source url tag - OK, validated. Buildroot is ignored - present anyway. OK %clean is ignored - present anyway. OK Build Requires list - OK Summary and description - OK API documentation - OK [+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . [+]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. [~ ghc-gtk]$ md5sum ghc-gtk-0.11.2-3.fc13.src/gtk-0.11.2.tar.gz ede94895ef679f1c6102c7eee5f021a1 ghc-gtk-0.11.2-3.fc13.src/gtk-0.11.2.tar.gz [~ ghc-gtk]$ md5sum ../gtk-0.11.2.tar.gz ede94895ef679f1c6102c7eee5f021a1 ../gtk-0.11.2.tar.gz [+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary 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. [NA]MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly using the %find_lang macro [NA]MUST: Packages stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review. [+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. [+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. devel package contains source code. [+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. Developer documentation is in the -devel pacakge. [+]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. [NA]MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [NA]MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [+]MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: {name} = %{version}-%{release} [NA]MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [NA]MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section [+]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: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+]MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. Should items [+]SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+]SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. I installed the x86_64 bit rpms. Install went ok. [+]SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. cabal2spec-diff is OK. 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 630222] Review Request: ghc-colour - A model for human colour/color perception
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Sep '10

21 Sep '10

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=630222 --- Comment #5 from Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> 2010-09-21 22:42:20 EDT --- Yeah. Why the cabal file doesn't say 'MIT', I don't know. I saw it and said "that's BSD minus the 3 clauses, therefore MIT". That page is handy for checking MIT licenses in all its forms though. -- 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 630272] Review Request: ghc-tagsoup - Parsing HTML/XML documents library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Sep '10

21 Sep '10

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=630272 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |ghc-tagsoup -- 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 630273] Review Request: ghc-authenticate - Authentication methods for Haskell web applications
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Sep '10

21 Sep '10

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=630273 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |ghc-authenticate -- 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

← Newer
1
...
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
...
46
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel September 2010