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 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt; 2008-12-23 13:53:41 EDT --- My advice would be to simply not attempt multiple library versions. If you find yourself in a case where you have to maintain something backrevved, you're already lost to a certain degree. This package looks fine to me. rpmlint says: ghc-HTTP.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.10.1/HTTP-3001.1.5/libHSHTTP-3001.1.5.a ghc-HTTP-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation ghc-HTTP-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.10.1/HTTP-3001.1.5/libHSHTTP-3001.1.5_p.a which are all normal for Haskell packages. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: e34d9f979bafbbf2e45bf90a9ee9bfd291f3c67c291a250cc0a6378431578aeb HTTP-3001.1.5.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * 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. * final provides and requires are sane: ghc-HTTP-3001.1.5-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm ghc-HTTP-devel = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 ghc-HTTP = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 ghc-HTTP(x86-64) = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 = /bin/sh ghc = 6.10.1 ghc-HTTP-prof-3001.1.5-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm ghc-HTTP-prof = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 ghc-HTTP-prof(x86-64) = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 = ghc-HTTP = 3001.1.5-1.fc11 ghc-prof = 6.10.1 * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * 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 OK (ghc package registration and documentation indexing) * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the 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.