haskell-devel April 2014

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

2 participants
437 discussions

[Bug 1075569] Review Request: ghc-ansi-wl-pprint - The Wadler/Leijen Pretty Printer for colored ANSI terminal output
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Apr '14

02 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075569 Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ghc-ansi-wl-pprint Short Description: The Wadler/Leijen Pretty Printer for colored ANSI terminal output Owners: codeblock petersen Branches: f20 epel7 f19 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EZy1AMQ4bc&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1075569] Review Request: ghc-ansi-wl-pprint - The Wadler/Leijen Pretty Printer for colored ANSI terminal output
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Apr '14

02 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1075569 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/petersen/pkgreview/1075569-ghc-ansi-wl- pprint/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 532480 bytes in 18 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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 is included in %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Haskell: [x]: This should never happen ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6698269 [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel-0.6.7.1-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-1.fc20.src.rpm ghc-ansi-wl-pprint.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6.7.1 ['0.6.7.1-1.fc20', '0.6.7.1-1'] ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel/README.textile ghc-ansi-wl-pprint.src: W: strange-permission ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1.tar.gz 0600L 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel ghc-ansi-wl-pprint ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel/README.textile ghc-ansi-wl-pprint.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6.7.1 ['0.6.7.1-1.fc20', '0.6.7.1-1'] 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ghc(ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-224eec9b3819d85bbf7dcc398a1b424b) ghc-ansi-wl-pprint(x86-64) ghc-compiler ghc-devel(ansi-terminal-0.6-0cc945db2421314246a07a2e8bf2b9e1) ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc-ansi-wl-pprint (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ghc(ansi-terminal-0.6-0cc945db2421314246a07a2e8bf2b9e1) ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) libHSansi-terminal-0.6-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSarray-0.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSbase-4.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSdeepseq-1.3.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSghc-prim-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSinteger-gmp-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSold-locale-1.0.0.5-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHStime-1.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSunix-2.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libutil.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel: ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel(x86-64) ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-static ghc-devel(ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-224eec9b3819d85bbf7dcc398a1b424b) ghc-ansi-wl-pprint: ghc(ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-224eec9b3819d85bbf7dcc398a1b424b) ghc-ansi-wl-pprint ghc-ansi-wl-pprint(x86-64) libHSansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) Unversioned so-files -------------------- ghc-ansi-wl-pprint: /usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1/libHSansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1-ghc7.6.3.so Source checksums ---------------- http://hackage.haskell.org/package/ansi-wl-pprint-0.6.7.1/ansi-wl-pprint-0.… : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d980c265cacf6d6aa37a24d056e730b678680e07d3ab87210affb415de0ac1af CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d980c265cacf6d6aa37a24d056e730b678680e07d3ab87210affb415de0ac1af Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1075569 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/ghc-ansi-wl-pprint-devel/README.textile Please fix the readme file encoding, or simpler just don't include it when importing. ghc-ansi-wl-pprint.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6.7.1 ['0.6.7.1-1.fc20', '0.6.7.1-1'] Adding a changelog entry could prevent this warning. But I may revert cabal-rpm to include release again in the generated changelog entry to avoid this. Package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wvJTCpq6W8&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1055838] Review Request: ghc-time-compat - Compatibility with old-time for the time package
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Apr '14

02 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055838 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed| |2014-04-01 23:22:41 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fygZOWOPgk&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1082515] Review Request: shake - Make-like build system
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Apr '14

02 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082515 Ricky Elrod <relrod(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |relrod(a)redhat.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |relrod(a)redhat.com Alias| |shake Flags| |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eKem7IJxIS&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1055838] Review Request: ghc-time-compat - Compatibility with old-time for the time package
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Apr '14

01 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055838 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard|Ready | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5B61xR04KC&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1055838] Review Request: ghc-time-compat - Compatibility with old-time for the time package
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Apr '14

01 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055838 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|unspecified |low --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- Bit like transformers-compat I wonder if we can't get anyway with patching happstack-server for this instead. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fz4MUiPEHp&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 1082515] Review Request: shake - Make-like build system
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Apr '14

01 Apr '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082515 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard|NotReady | --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- I disabled testsuite on arm in Spec: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/shake/shake.spec SRPM: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/shake/shake-0.11.4-2.fc20.src.rpm Koji rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6691814 Note also I removed the jquery and other report generating webpage files from the installation to avoid being blocked by jquery and other js reviews. It is a secondary feature so I think it is okay for now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Kir206Kdck&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel April 2014