[Bug 662258] Review Request: ghc-pcre-light - A regex library for Perl 5 compatible regular expressions

[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=662258

--- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat.com> 2011-01-28 11:04:32 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > > ghc-pcre-light-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-pcre-light-devel
> > > ghc-pcre-light-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
> > > /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/pcre-light-0.4/libHSpcre-light-0.4_p.a
> > 
> > Standard Haskell packaging things. These files are used when profiling the code
> > which implies that the -devel package exist.
> 
> Shouldn't the libHSpcre-light-0.4_p.a appear in the devel package rather than
> in the main package?

Well we have been subpackaging profiling libraries "forever" like,
since they are normally not needed for development but occasionally
useful when doing profiling builds.  Perhaps it would be more correct
to name them devel-prof or something or one day hopefully move to
shared profiling libraries.

"-prof" subpackages are mentioned in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Haskell

> > > 2) There shouldn't be common_summary, common_description, and ghc_pkg_c_deps
> > > macros since these are only used once.  The ghc_pkg_deps line should be removed
> > > completely because the macro is undefined.
> > 
> > These are also standard Haskell packaging things. I think the %{common_*}
> > macros are used in the %{?ghc_lib_package} line which is where the -prof and
> > -devel subpackages are defined.
> 
> I don't see any reference to this on the Haskell packaging guidelines page:
> 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Haskell

I have been slowly revising the guidelines, which have become out of date:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell

and hope to submit them for RFC and review soon.

The macros defined in ghc-rpm-macros really help to simplify
Haskell packaging and avoid having to keep close to 100 packages now
in sync with latest evolving packaging (that will soon be close to
300 .spec files).

(In reply to comment #5)
> I also don't see a %files section.  Is that somehow included by
> %{?ghc_lib_package}?

That's correct: the macros handle the repetitive steps of
build, install and filelist generation, since they are essentially
the same for all haskell package built with Cabal.

-- 
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.