[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 488665] Review Request: hscolour - Haskell source code highlighter

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=488665





--- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat.com>  2009-03-10 07:15:01 EDT ---
[ok, take2: first attempt to reply earlier disappeared with firefox...]

(In reply to comment #1)
> http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/darcs/hscolour/

Thanks - fixing.

> IMO the upstream maintains a nice website.

Agreed better to use an upstream website when available and up to date.

> ghc-hscolour-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> ghc-hscolour-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> ghc-hscolour-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
> ghc-hscolour-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-hscolour-devel

These can be waived I think.

> hscolour.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/HsColour 0775

Reproduced and still investigating.

> hscolour.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/bin/HsColour

Yes, I think this is common to ghc executables.
I checked and alex, cabal-install, cpphs, ghc, darcs, happy, etc
all have this too.

> # MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
> with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
> %defattr(...) line. [14]
> Fail: See above rpmlint

Fixing with %attr for now anyway.

SPEC: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/hscolour/hscolour.spec
SRPM: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/hscolour/hscolour-1.12-2.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.