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=479793
--- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com 2009-01-14 03:10:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
Done. (Or I guess, your patch does this.) Although rpmbuild complains as I told you on IRC.
Strange - builds ok for me on f10 (and f11 mock) anyway.
Hmm, /usr/share/doc/ghc/libraries is owned by ghc-doc but not required by ghc-cpphs - looks like a oversight of the guidelines.
Wondering whether we should subpackage haddock docs for this or do something else.
Well, at any rate ghc-cpphs must depend on ghc-doc (or ghc-doc if we create a subpackage for the docs).
Right. Since ghc-doc is quite big I am leaning towards subpackaging for all libraries' docs generated by haddock. I guess in this case ghc-cpphs-doc say.
Any other thoughts from the Haskell SIG?
haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org