haskell-devel December 2010

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
224 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 630224] Review Request: ghc-attempt - Concrete data type for handling extensible exceptions as failures
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630224 Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |MODIFIED Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-17 23:27:38 EST --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-attempt Short Description: Concrete data type for handling extensible exceptions as failures Owners: mathstuf Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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 630205] Review Request: ghc-regexpr - Regular expression like Perl/Ruby in Haskell
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630205 Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |MODIFIED Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-17 23:27:35 EST --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-regexpr Short Description: Regular expression like Perl/Ruby in Haskell Owners: mathstuf Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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 630204] Review Request: ghc-mtlparse - Haskell mtlparse library
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630204 Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |MODIFIED Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Ben Boeckel <mathstuf(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-17 23:27:35 EST --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-mtlparse Short Description: Haskell mtlparse library Owners: mathstuf Branches: F-13 F-14 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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 630223] Review Request: ghc-failure - A simple type class for success/failure computations
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630223 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2010-12-17 23:22:07 EST --- ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc14,ghc-neither-0.1.0-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc14,ghc-neit… -- 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 630224] Review Request: ghc-attempt - Concrete data type for handling extensible exceptions as failures
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630224 Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-17 22:23:56 EST --- [+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. rpmlint -i ghc-attempt-*x86_64*.rpm ghc-attempt-0.3.0-1.fc14.src.rpm ghc-attempt.spec ghc-attempt-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-attempt-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-attempt-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-attempt-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/attempt-0.3.0/libHSattempt-0.3.0_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. ghc-attempt.src: W: strange-permission attempt-0.3.0.tar.gz 0640L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. ghc-attempt.src: W: strange-permission ghc-attempt.spec 0640L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 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, BSD 2-clause variant. License mentioned in source file also. No prebuilt external bits - OK Spec legibity - OK Package template - OK, compared with cabal file generated by cabal2spec 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, depends on ghc-failure Summary and description - OK API documentation - OK, present in devel package [+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . License is BSD 2 clause variant [+]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. md5sum ghc-attempt-0.3.0-1.fc14.src/attempt-0.3.0.tar.gz 051be218858e24ffd53b4e435f024611 ghc-attempt-0.3.0-1.fc14.src/attempt-0.3.0.tar.gz md5sum ~/Downloads/attempt-0.3.0.tar.gz 051be218858e24ffd53b4e435f024611 ~/Downloads/attempt-0.3.0.tar.gz [+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. Built on x86_64. [+]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. Checked with rpmquery --list [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. Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides [+]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. Checked with ls -lR [+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+]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} rpm -e ghc-attempt error: Failed dependencies: ghc-attempt = 0.3.0-1.fc14 is needed by (installed) ghc-attempt-devel-0.3.0-1.fc14.x86_64 rpm -e ghc-attempt-devel error: Failed dependencies: ghc-attempt-devel = 0.3.0-1.fc14 is needed by (installed) ghc-attempt-prof-0.3.0-1.fc14.x86_64 [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. Checked with rpmquery --list [+]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. Installed the package. Wrote a small program that imports the module Data.Attempt. Compiles and builds fine. [+]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 630223] Review Request: ghc-failure - A simple type class for success/failure computations
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630223 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2010-12-17 15:32:29 EST --- ghc-neither-0.1.0-1.fc13, ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update ghc-neither ghc-failure'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc13,ghc-neit… -- 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 630223] Review Request: ghc-failure - A simple type class for success/failure computations
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Dec '10

17 Dec '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=630223 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2010-12-17 07:45:45 EST --- ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc13,ghc-neither-0.1.0-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc13,ghc-neit… -- 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 630205] Review Request: ghc-regexpr - Regular expression like Perl/Ruby in Haskell
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '10

16 Dec '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=630205 --- Comment #3 from Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-16 22:43:45 EST --- Spec: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-regexpr/ghc-regexpr.spec SRPM: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-regexpr/ghc-regexpr-0.5.3-1.fc14.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.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 630205] Review Request: ghc-regexpr - Regular expression like Perl/Ruby in Haskell
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '10

16 Dec '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=630205 Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Lakshmi Narasimhan <lakshminaras2002(a)gmail.com> 2010-12-16 22:42:34 EST --- [+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. ghc-regexpr.src: W: strange-permission regexpr-0.5.3.tar.gz 0640L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. ghc-regexpr.src: W: strange-permission ghc-regexpr.spec 0640L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. ghc-regexpr-prof.i686: E: devel-dependency ghc-regexpr-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-regexpr-prof.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-regexpr-prof.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.3/regexpr-0.5.3/libHSregexpr-0.5.3_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 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 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, in devel package [+]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. md5sum ghc-regexpr-0.5.3-1.fc14.src/regexpr-0.5.3.tar.gz 481f5354628cacea8958d457ea6b12b8 ghc-regexpr-0.5.3-1.fc14.src/regexpr-0.5.3.tar.gz md5sum ~/Downloads/regexpr-0.5.3.tar.gz 481f5354628cacea8958d457ea6b12b8 ~/Downloads/regexpr-0.5.3.tar.gz [+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. Built on i686. [+]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. Checked with rpmquery --list [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. checked with rpmquery --whatprovides [+]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. Checked with ls -lR [+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. [+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+]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} rpm -e ghc-regexpr error: Failed dependencies: ghc-regexpr = 0.5.3-1.fc14 is needed by (installed) ghc-regexpr-devel-0.5.3-1.fc14.i686 rpm -e ghc-regexpr-devel error: Failed dependencies: ghc-regexpr-devel = 0.5.3-1.fc14 is needed by (installed) ghc-regexpr-prof-0.5.3-1.fc14.i686 [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. checked with rpmquery --list [+]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. Installed the package. Wrote a small program that imports the module Text.RegexPR. Compiles and runs fine. [+]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 630205] Review Request: ghc-regexpr - Regular expression like Perl/Ruby in Haskell
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '10

14 Dec '10

1 0

← Newer
1
...
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...
23
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel December 2010