November 2008 - haskell-devel - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 --- Comment #36 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-11-13 19:50:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #35) > One remaining question: if ghc library packages in the future do grow a runtime > component, that will imply not only that this package grows a -devel subpackage > but that anything which build against it has to change to having a build > dependency on the -devel package. That could be avoided now in a couple of > ways, but I don't know whether the possibility of ghc supporting shared > libraries is sufficiently remote that its not worth it. The simplest way is > for this package to provide ghc-zlib-devel and for other packages to > BuildRequires: that. In any case, I'll leave that up to you folks. That is a very good suggestion and I think we should adopt that, since ghc is moving to support shared libraries. > We definitely need to get the full list of dependencies into the guidelines. > Currently I think the haddock ones are missing. Or am I confused and is > haddock somehow brought in by ghc? ghc-6.10.1 includes a version of haddock now, but ghc-6.8.3 does not. (Hence my suggestion to do the review against ghc-6.10.1, but it is not yet in rawhide, just 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 --- Comment #35 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> 2008-11-13 14:22:12 EDT --- One remaining question: if ghc library packages in the future do grow a runtime component, that will imply not only that this package grows a -devel subpackage but that anything which build against it has to change to having a build dependency on the -devel package. That could be avoided now in a couple of ways, but I don't know whether the possibility of ghc supporting shared libraries is sufficiently remote that its not worth it. The simplest way is for this package to provide ghc-zlib-devel and for other packages to BuildRequires: that. In any case, I'll leave that up to you folks. You will definitely need some extra dependencies for the scriptlets. I think there's one that's not listed above in comment 34; you'll need Rerquires(postun): haddock for the %ghc_reindex_haddock script. I'm not sure what is required for the register.sh and unregister.sh scripts although I suspect the above list should do it. We definitely need to get the full list of dependencies into the guidelines. Currently I think the haddock ones are missing. Or am I confused and is haddock somehow brought in by ghc? rpmlint output: ghc-zlib.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.8.3/zlib-0.5.0.0/libHSzlib-0.5.0.0.a ghc-zlib.x86_64: E: devel-dependency zlib-devel ghc-zlib-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation ghc-zlib-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.8.3/zlib-0.5.0.0/libHSzlib-0.5.0.0_p.a I agree that the above are all acceptable and expected. * source files match upstream: 20e067cfbec87ec062ac144875a60e158ea6cf7836aac031ec367fcdd5446891 zlib-0.5.0.0.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. (library for ghc -> ghc- prefix) * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. X Scriptlet dependencies are mostly missing. final provides and requires: ghc-zlib-0.5.0.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm ghc-zlib = 0.5.0.0-1.fc10 ghc-zlib(x86-64) = 0.5.0.0-1.fc10 = /bin/sh ghc = 6.8.3 haddock09 zlib-devel ghc-zlib-prof-0.5.0.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm ghc-zlib-prof = 0.5.0.0-1.fc10 ghc-zlib-prof(x86-64) = 0.5.0.0-1.fc10 = ghc-zlib = 0.5.0.0 * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 --- Comment #34 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-11-12 02:48:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #33) > I'm easy. Basically the package looks pretty good to me now, my only comment is that we need requires for all the install scripts I guess. Because of not needing haddock09 those would also look easier with dist-f11 in koji # for ghc-pkg and haddock Requires(pre): ghc = %{ghc_version} Requires(preun): ghc = %{ghc_version} Requires(post): ghc = %{ghc_version} Requires(postun): ghc = %{ghc_version} (they need to be versioned for ghc-pkg) > I'll be pushing a nearly-zero-day update of ghc 6.10.1 for f10 if I can. (It might be better to wait a little longer I think for ghc-6.10.1 to stabilise and also after seeing how much work it was updating f9 to ghc-6.8.3, but let's see how we go.) -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] haskell-sig pseudo-user in FAS

by Jens-Ulrik Petersen

We now have a haskell-sig pseudo-user in the Fedora Accounts System to make it easier to track fedora haskell bugs. I am going to add it to the CC field of all the current haskell packages so that bugs will get CC to this list automatically and so will be seen by the SIG. This might be a good time to ask again if people feel we have too much bugzilla traffic on the list instead of email discussion. If people feel that way we could also make a fedora-haskell-bugs list for the bugzilla traffic. Thoughts? Jens

15 years, 5 months

2
3
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 469484] Upgrade path: ghc EVR higher in F8 than F9

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=469484 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2008-11-11 21:59:00 EDT --- ghc-6.8.3-10.fc9, gtk2hs-0.9.13-3.fc9, haddock-2.0.0.0-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 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 gtk2hs haddock'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2008-9388 -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 467893] Yum update cycles between ghc-prof and ghc682-prof

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=467893 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2008-11-11 21:58:57 EDT --- ghc-6.8.3-10.fc9, gtk2hs-0.9.13-3.fc9, haddock-2.0.0.0-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 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 gtk2hs haddock'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2008-9388 -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 --- Comment #33 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> 2008-11-11 19:08:53 EDT --- I'm easy. I'll be pushing a nearly-zero-day update of ghc 6.10.1 for f10 if I can. -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 --- Comment #32 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-11-11 19:06:23 EDT --- Thanks, Bryan. Perhaps the review should target f11 now since we have ghc-6.10.1 in dist-f11. But that is up to Jason really. -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 470756] Review Request: ghc-HTTP - Haskell HTTP client 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=470756 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |471003 Depends on|471003 | -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc

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=425882 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |471003 Depends on|471003 | -- 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.

15 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel November 2008