Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.2.1.0.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: vty is terminal GUI library in the niche of ncurses. It is intended to be easy to use, have no confusing corner cases, and good support for common terminal types. The version is bumped by .1 because of a backported patch which bumps dependencies and would probably cause hell with cabal otherwise. % lintmock fedora-14-x86_64-bb ghc-vty.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.2.1.0-parallel2.patch 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.2.1.0.tar.gz 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L ghc-vty.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-vty-devel ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/vty-4.2.1.0.1/libHSvty-4.2.1.0.1_p.a 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings.
Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.4.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Updated to 4.4.0.0 and dropped the version bump patch. % lintmock fedora-14-x86_64-bb ghc-vty.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.4.0.0.tar.gz 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L ghc-vty.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-vty-devel ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/vty-4.4.0.0/libHSvty-4.4.0.0_p.a 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings.
Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.4.0.0.1-1.fc14.src.rpm % lintmock fedora-14-x86_64-bb ghc-vty.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.4.0.0.1.tar.gz 0640L ghc-vty.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-vty-devel ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation ghc-vty-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/vty-4.4.0.0.1/libHSvty-4.4.0.0.1_p.a 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings.
Recent vty > 4.6 no longer depends on vector-space.
But 4.7.0.4 requires vector.
Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.7.0.10-1.fc18.src.rpm ghc-vty.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.7.0.10.tar.gz 0640L ghc-vty.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Taking this review
(In reply to comment #5) > ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L > ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.7.0.10.tar.gz 0640L Probably best to 'chmod 644' the files before doing rpmbuild -- that's quite a secure home directory. Wait until the full review before changing this though, no point regenerating the SRPM just for permission warnings.
(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L > > ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.7.0.10.tar.gz 0640L > > Probably best to 'chmod 644' the files before doing rpmbuild -- that's quite > a secure home directory. Wait until the full review before changing this > though, no point regenerating the SRPM just for permission warnings. They'll be fine when generated via fedora-git (the tarball uploads are fine too once on the server which has been verified by infrastructure). It's only local stuff I build which has this issue.
MD5 checksum does not match the upstream download, and 4.7.0.14 is now out -- everything else looks fine, so please update the spec and SRPM and I'll then approve it. Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== Generic ==== [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x]: MUST 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]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. xt [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. [!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/michel/sources/fedora/projects/FedoraReview/src/630221/vty-4.7.0.10.tar.gz : MD5SUM this package : 171ece14078363412467967bfac9881c MD5SUM upstream package : d6fde5f1318951bc2724a1a45f9070dd [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [!]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. 4.7.0.14 is out [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/michel/sources/fedora/projects/FedoraReview/src/630221/vty-4.7.0.10.tar.gz : MD5SUM this package : 171ece14078363412467967bfac9881c MD5SUM upstream package : d6fde5f1318951bc2724a1a45f9070dd See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL [!]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. 4.7.0.14 is out Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0git External plugins:
Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.7.0.14-1.fc18.src.rpm Thanks for the review.
Ping?
OK, the only change needed is to use %ghc_gen_filelists %{name} to generate the file listing (per guidelines). The current way in the spec generates duplicates and the LICENSE file is not tagged %doc. Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== Generic ==== [x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [!]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/doc/ghc-vty-4.7.0.14 Perhaps use %ghc_gen_filelists %{name} as per the current guidelines? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Haskell#File_lists [x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [!]: MUST 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. See previous [!] -- the file is currently included but not marked %doc [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: SHOULD Buildroot is not present Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [x]: SHOULD Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Source0 (vty-4.7.0.14.tar.gz) [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/doc/ghc-vty-4.7.0.14 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles [!]: MUST 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. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseShortNames [!]: MUST Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present. Note: ghc-vty-devel-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm : /usr/lib64/ghc-7.0.4/vty-4.7.0.14/libHSvty-4.7.0.14.a ghc-vty- devel-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm : /usr/lib64/ghc-7.0.4/vty-4.7.0.14/libHSvty-4.7.0.14_p.a See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries Rpmlint ------- Checking: ghc-vty-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm ghc-vty-devel-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm ghc-vty-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.src.rpm ghc-vty.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission ghc-vty.spec 0640L ghc-vty.src: W: strange-permission vty-4.7.0.14.tar.gz 0640L 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ghc-vty-devel ghc-vty-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ghc-vty-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ghc(base-4.3.1.0) = d2298ea3d0e16f270dfe58dfbda12bff ghc(bytestring-0.9.1.10) = 6aa1efbfa95d1689fc03d61e7c4b27c4 ghc(containers-0.4.0.0) = b4885363abca642443ccd842502a3b7e ghc(deepseq-1.1.0.2) = 0465f803f7d27d264907e7e03e72a71f ghc(ghc-prim-0.2.0.0) = d9df11f804556f362beb0ea4e67261ba ghc(mtl-2.0.1.0) = 5b7a9cce5565d8cc8721ba4f95becf1b ghc(parallel-3.1.0.1) = cecd6f84e9c097c6abc356ad52b80887 ghc(parsec-3.1.1) = 33474162d2bbd21ea1e4f1e3830243d8 ghc(terminfo-0.3.2.3) = ea876a3aa39896fd6ee2d56be977a5b0 ghc(unix-2.4.2.0) = 58b1a2dba5afd4464c2e3918310189ff ghc(utf8-string-0.3.7) = b8c58384678e55bfda62a9801c3a6a16 ghc(vector-0.9.1) = ba9ee29a5d31f1685f2fe863843c9d72 libHSarray-0.3.0.2-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSbase-4.3.1.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSbytestring-0.9.1.10-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHScontainers-0.4.0.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSdeepseq-1.1.0.2-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSextensible-exceptions-0.1.1.2-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSghc-prim-0.2.0.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSinteger-gmp-0.2.0.3-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSmtl-2.0.1.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSparallel-3.1.0.1-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSparsec-3.1.1-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSprimitive-0.4.0.1-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSterminfo-0.3.2.3-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHStransformers-0.2.2.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSunix-2.4.2.0-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSutf8-string-0.3.7-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libHSvector-0.9.1-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) libncursesw.so.5()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libtinfo.so.5()(64bit) libutil.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ghc-vty-devel-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ghc(vty-4.7.0.14) = 726cbdf71d3611adfff4cbcde540c8a8 ghc-compiler = 7.0.4 ghc-devel(base-4.3.1.0) = d2298ea3d0e16f270dfe58dfbda12bff ghc-devel(bytestring-0.9.1.10) = 6aa1efbfa95d1689fc03d61e7c4b27c4 ghc-devel(containers-0.4.0.0) = b4885363abca642443ccd842502a3b7e ghc-devel(deepseq-1.1.0.2) = 0465f803f7d27d264907e7e03e72a71f ghc-devel(ghc-prim-0.2.0.0) = d9df11f804556f362beb0ea4e67261ba ghc-devel(mtl-2.0.1.0) = 5b7a9cce5565d8cc8721ba4f95becf1b ghc-devel(parallel-3.1.0.1) = cecd6f84e9c097c6abc356ad52b80887 ghc-devel(parsec-3.1.1) = 33474162d2bbd21ea1e4f1e3830243d8 ghc-devel(terminfo-0.3.2.3) = ea876a3aa39896fd6ee2d56be977a5b0 ghc-devel(unix-2.4.2.0) = 58b1a2dba5afd4464c2e3918310189ff ghc-devel(utf8-string-0.3.7) = b8c58384678e55bfda62a9801c3a6a16 ghc-devel(vector-0.9.1) = ba9ee29a5d31f1685f2fe863843c9d72 ghc-devel(vty-4.7.0.14) = 726cbdf71d3611adfff4cbcde540c8a8 ghc-prof(base-4.3.1.0) = d2298ea3d0e16f270dfe58dfbda12bff ghc-prof(bytestring-0.9.1.10) = 6aa1efbfa95d1689fc03d61e7c4b27c4 ghc-prof(containers-0.4.0.0) = b4885363abca642443ccd842502a3b7e ghc-prof(deepseq-1.1.0.2) = 0465f803f7d27d264907e7e03e72a71f ghc-prof(ghc-prim-0.2.0.0) = d9df11f804556f362beb0ea4e67261ba ghc-prof(mtl-2.0.1.0) = 5b7a9cce5565d8cc8721ba4f95becf1b ghc-prof(parallel-3.1.0.1) = cecd6f84e9c097c6abc356ad52b80887 ghc-prof(parsec-3.1.1) = 33474162d2bbd21ea1e4f1e3830243d8 ghc-prof(terminfo-0.3.2.3) = ea876a3aa39896fd6ee2d56be977a5b0 ghc-prof(unix-2.4.2.0) = 58b1a2dba5afd4464c2e3918310189ff ghc-prof(utf8-string-0.3.7) = b8c58384678e55bfda62a9801c3a6a16 ghc-prof(vector-0.9.1) = ba9ee29a5d31f1685f2fe863843c9d72 ghc-vty = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 Provides -------- ghc-vty-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm: ghc(vty-4.7.0.14) = 726cbdf71d3611adfff4cbcde540c8a8 ghc-vty = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 ghc-vty(x86-64) = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 libHSvty-4.7.0.14-ghc7.0.4.so()(64bit) ghc-vty-devel-4.7.0.14-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm: ghc-devel(vty-4.7.0.14) = 726cbdf71d3611adfff4cbcde540c8a8 ghc-prof(vty-4.7.0.14) = 726cbdf71d3611adfff4cbcde540c8a8 ghc-vty-devel = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 ghc-vty-devel(x86-64) = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 ghc-vty-doc = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 ghc-vty-prof = 4.7.0.14-1.fc17 MD5-sum check ------------- http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/vty/4.7.0.14/vty-4.7.0.14.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c962396bb2a95dc233e79564c00240a0494cd6b609a83bed4f30d2939714f671 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c962396bb2a95dc233e79564c00240a0494cd6b609a83bed4f30d2939714f671 Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0 (2fb2447) last change: 2012-07-22 Command line :./fedora-review -b 630221 -m fedora-17-x86_64 External plugins:
Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-vty/ghc-vty-4.7.0.20-1.fc19.src.rpm Updated to the latest cabal-rpm-generated format. If %doc is still incorrect, ghc-rpm-macros needs to be looked at.
Michel, ping?
Ah let me check ghc-rpm-macros is doing the right thing.
Latest version is now 4.7.3 btw. ghc-rpm-macros should be doing the right thing for current releases I think. (Those was a back-compatible duplication needed earlier for older releases.)
Created attachment 709401 [details] ghc-vty.spec-1.patch Ben, I would handle the doc files in datadir like this. (The libraries that push doc files into datadir are kind of annoying: probably I should add a macro to handle them for such packages.)
Apologies - this review slipped through the cracks. Ben, should I do the review with or without Jens' patch?
Closing out old Haskell Package Reviews that use deprecated macros like %ghc_devel_package, etc, which are no longer available in F20 Rawhide. Please update your package using cabal-rpm-0.8.x or later and re-open or file a new Review Request. Thanks!