haskell-devel October 2008

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
36 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

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=425882 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW AssignedTo|tibbs(a)math.uh.edu |nobody(a)fedoraproject.org --- Comment #21 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-10-22 23:07:00 EDT --- I just pushed ghc-6.8.3-9.fc10 to koji so this package review should be able to proceed from rawhide soon. Note that I added a new macro pkg_docdir so that should take care of tibbs' comment on hsc_name (I have been working to get rid of the latter macro). -- 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

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=425882 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #20 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2008-10-22 15:37:12 EDT --- Finally. This is the first one of these I've seen being done, so I'll have a few probably obvious questions. First off, why the hsc_name macro? Or rather, why go to the trouble of defining it to "ghc" only to use "ghc" explicitly later? Wouldn't it be simpler just to not use the macro at all? If you build a package against ghc-zlib, will it be required at runtime? I guess what's confusing me is all the talk of static linking, and yet the .a file is packaged, which implies that this is really some sort of -devel package needed at compile time. Is there no kind of runtime/-devel split of these packages? There's no reason to include the LICENSE file twice, is there? Otherwise the %ghc_* macros hide all of the complexity nicely. I'm not sure I'd know how to find a test suite if one were included, so I can't really check that. With some good answers to the above questions I don't see any reason this wouldn't pass review. -- 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 426750] Review Request: ghc-utf8-string - Support reading and writing UTF8 Strings
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

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=426750 David Woodhouse <dwmw2(a)infradead.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dwmw2(a)infradead.org Flag| |needinfo+ -- 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

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=425882 --- Comment #19 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2008-10-22 12:49:41 EDT --- Well, actually I'm about 1.5 hours into downloading the ghc packages from static-repos. Only about 30MB (out of 77MB) to go! Caching should of course make this reasonable in the future, but it still takes 20 minutes just to pull fresh repodata. -- 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

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=425882 --- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2008-10-22 11:24:44 EDT --- Unfortunately I think that instead of "rawhide" you really mean "from the F-11 branch" because the latest package tagged into rawhide is ghc-6.8.3-8.fc10. I'll have to cook up a mock config to suck in dist-f11. -- 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

Re: [Fedora-haskell-list] Re: Planning for the Haskell Platform ... and documentation
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 22 Oct '08

22 Oct '08

> > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan > > <bos(a)serpentine.com> wrote: > >> To update the > >> index, we simply build a big haddock command line, telling it where to find > >> all the existing haddocks. I'll experiment and send out precise details. > > > > I presume we can just shove this in a macro, add it to the guidelines > > as a requirement for any package with docs in haddock, and be done > > with it? Can we use haddock-2.0 for this with ghc-6.8.3 or should it be haddock-0.9 in that case? Jens

2 1

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Oct '08

21 Oct '08

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=425882 --- Comment #16 from Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond(a)gmail.com> 2008-10-22 01:23:19 EDT --- Sorry, school's kicking my butt again. :/ -- 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

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=425882 --- Comment #15 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> 2008-10-21 00:31:04 EDT --- Thanks, Jason. Yaakov is busy with other stuff at the moment and likely to remain so for a while, so here are the latest spec and SRPM files: http://bos.fedorapeople.org/ghc-zlib-0.4.0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm http://bos.fedorapeople.org/ghc-zlib.spec Remember that these need a fresh rawhide ghc (I have ghc-6.10.0.20081007-6.fc11.x86_64) to work. The rpmlint warnings for the binary RPMs are expected and normal. -- 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Oct '08

20 Oct '08

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=425882 --- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2008-10-21 00:16:05 EDT --- Is there an updated srpm that should be reviewed? I'll be happy to look at this package but I'm not sure if Yaakov is still working on this. -- 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

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel October 2008