SRPM link : https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/ghc-gconf-0.11.1-1.fc14.src.rpm?attredirects=0&d=1 SPEC file link : https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/ghc-gconf.spec?attredirects=0&d=1 rpmlint output: rpmlint -i *.rpm ghc-gconf.spec ghc-gconf-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-gconf-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-gconf-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-gconf-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/gconf-0.11.1/libHSgconf-0.11.1_p.a A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. Will upgrade to 0.12.0 for >f15
You need to include the text of the license in its documentation files. This is mandatory. I would also suggest replacing the pkg_name macro with srcname which is less confusing, but this is entirely your choice. On the other hand the common_description macro looks useless to me because it's used in a single place. Wouldn't be better if you removed it and used something like this? %description GConf is a configuration database .... %if %{with shared} This package provides the shared library. %endif The same goes for common_summary.
Hello, There is a COPYING file in /usr/share/doc/ghc-gconf-{version}. That contains the license text.
Sorry, you're right. I looked at rpmlint's output for ghc-gconf-prof and thought that it was for ghc-gconf. As for the macros, I've noticed that xmonad uses a similar SPEC, so I guess your SPEC is fine from this point of view. koji scratch build for other reviewers: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2689186
As earlier discussed on Fedora haskell-devel list, dropping libraries for now from the toplevel of Haskell-pkg-reviews, so we, the Haskell SIG, can focus more on getting Haskell apps into Fedora. To get you library back under the tracker please submit a bin or binlib package that depends on this library and make this bug block that package review. It is a good idea to submit full stacks of packages and then to add the toplevel program to the tracker.
http://narasim.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/ghc-gconf-0.11.1-2.fc14.src.rpm http://narasim.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/ghc-gconf.spec rpmlint -i ghc-gconf.spec ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/ghc-gconf-0.11.1-2.fc14.src.rpm ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/ghc-gconf-*.rpm ghc-gconf-prof.i686: E: devel-dependency ghc-gconf-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-gconf-prof.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-gconf-prof.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.3/gconf-0.11.1/libHSgconf-0.11.1_p.a A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. 0.11.2 version may not build with F15 and rawhide. Will upgrade to 0.12 for > F15.
Not too many reverse deps: http://packdeps.haskellers.com/reverse/gconf
I'm commenting on this bug as per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656892#c11. You might want to rebuild the spec file with the latest cabal2spec which is at version 0.25.4 now. Besides that, comment #5 covers the other comments I would have made.
Closing this bug.