[Bug 1182435] Review Request: ghc-haddock-library - Library exposing some functionality of Haddock
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Jan 24 18:20:41 UTC 2015
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182435
Ricky Elrod <relrod at redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Ricky Elrod <relrod at redhat.com> ---
APPROVED.
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 798720 bytes in 36 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Haskell:
[x]: This should never happen
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ghc-haddock-library-1.1.1-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
ghc-haddock-library-devel-1.1.1-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
ghc-haddock-library-1.1.1-1.fc21.src.rpm
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
<mock-chroot>[root at t520 /]# rpmlint ghc-haddock-library-devel
ghc-haddock-library
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
<mock-chroot>[root at t520 /]# echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires
--------
ghc-haddock-library-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/bin/sh
ghc(haddock-library-1.1.1-f3b43d76133bcd414e415d3781a31024)
ghc-compiler
ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
ghc-devel(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
ghc-devel(deepseq-1.3.0.1-5cc4cd89bdc2e8f6db1833d95ec36926)
ghc-haddock-library(x86-64)
ghc-haddock-library (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57)
ghc(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f)
ghc(deepseq-1.3.0.1-5cc4cd89bdc2e8f6db1833d95ec36926)
libHSarray-0.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSbase-4.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSdeepseq-1.3.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSghc-prim-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libHSinteger-gmp-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libgmp.so.10()(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
Provides
--------
ghc-haddock-library-devel:
ghc-devel(haddock-library-1.1.1-f3b43d76133bcd414e415d3781a31024)
ghc-haddock-library-devel
ghc-haddock-library-devel(x86-64)
ghc-haddock-library-static
ghc-haddock-library:
ghc(haddock-library-1.1.1-f3b43d76133bcd414e415d3781a31024)
ghc-haddock-library
ghc-haddock-library(x86-64)
libHShaddock-library-1.1.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
Unversioned so-files
--------------------
ghc-haddock-library:
/usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/haddock-library-1.1.1/libHShaddock-library-1.1.1-ghc7.6.3.so
Source checksums
----------------
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/haddock-library-1.1.1/haddock-library-1.1.1.tar.gz
:
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
350c2dd4f62fc85debe53ea51ce2a7e8ec7c8abb1b5acc664c5adf80ebaa566a
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
350c2dd4f62fc85debe53ea51ce2a7e8ec7c8abb1b5acc664c5adf80ebaa566a
Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1182435
Buildroot used: fedora-21-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aosRKMnmeW&a=cc_unsubscribe
More information about the haskell-devel
mailing list