[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 546376] Review Request: ghc-chalmers-lava2000 - Haskell hardware description library
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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=546376
Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #24 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2010-06-29 09:33:41 EDT ---
Sorry, finally getting back to this now after rebuilding all the packages for
ghc-6.12.3...
Here is the review:
+:ok, NA: not applicable
MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint output
ghc-chalmers-lava2000.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell,
Gaitskell, Skellum
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
ghc-chalmers-lava2000.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell ->
Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum
ghc-chalmers-lava2000.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.1/chalmers-lava2000-1.1.1/libHSchalmers-lava2000-1.1.1-ghc6.12.1.so
(fixed with latest macros)
ghc-chalmers-lava2000.x86_64: W: executable-stack
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.1/chalmers-lava2000-1.1.1/libHSchalmers-lava2000-1.1.1-ghc6.12.1.so
(waived)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell ->
Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-devel (waived)
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ghc-chalmers-lava2000-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.1/chalmers-lava2000-1.1.1/libHSchalmers-lava2000-1.1.1_p.a
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
[+] MUST: Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: spec file name must match base package %{name}
[+] MUST: Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: Licensing Guidelines
But please contact the author to request adding headers to the source files.
[+] MUST: License field in the package spec file must match actual license.
[+] MUST: include license files in %doc if available in source
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English and be legible.
[+] MUST: source md5sum matches upstream release
cf8c388bd905a57221169b54a4b4454e chalmers-lava2000-1.1.1.tar.gz
[+] MUST: must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on one main arch
[+] MUST: if necessary use ExcludeArch for other archs
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[NA] MUST: use %find_lang macro for .po translations
[NA] MUST: packages which store shared library files in the dynamic linker's
default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[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. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+] MUST: Large documentation files should 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.
[+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
Package 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.
13 years, 10 months
Re: [Fedora-haskell-list] headsup: ghc-6.12.3
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen
----- "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(a)wolff.to> wrote:
> > > Probably kaya and hedgewars should be rebuilt too.
> >
> > I'll bump hedgewars once the update shows up.
>
> I am not seeing a conflict with hedgewars after the update. So for now
> at least, I don't think hedgewars needs to be rebuilt.
Right, there shouldn't be any conflict since ghc links
statically by default (dynlinking is still considered experimental
upstream though it may become default for Linux in 6.14 perhaps).
I just suggested the rebuilds as best practice. :)
And to avoid future FTBFS bugs, etc. :)
> None of the ghc related requires (ghc-dataenc, ghc-network, ghc-stm,
> ghc-utf8-string) were version specific. Does that indicate that the
> requires
> were set up improperly or just that these packages didn't have an abi
> change?
You should not need those Requires since they are for shared libs.
Rpm would generate them for you automatically: so they should be
redundant. You could pass "-dynamic" to ghc if you want to
link to the shared libraries.
Thanks, Jens
ps Note also that ghc-utf8-string is also available and preferred in F13 now.
13 years, 10 months
[Fedora-haskell-list] headsup: ghc-6.12.3
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen
I built ghc-6.12.3 for F14. This will require rebuilding all
ghc library packages, which I and the Haskell SIG will be doing
over the coming days - the meantime please bear with us with
the broken dependencies...
Thanks,
Jens
13 years, 10 months