Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ghc-gtk2hs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189197 ------- Additional Comments From petersen@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-05-01 07:19 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > 1. I modified the spec file so that I can find my way around more easily. > You are free to use it. Thank you! > 2. I think the documentation package should install the documentation > in gtk2hs-doc-%{version} or ghc-gtk2hs-doc-%{version}, since all > directories in /usr/share/doc are versioned. Yes, guess you're right. (It seems to be the default place gtk2hs installs the docs, though personally I quite like it since I have it bookmarked and it is nice not to have to update it every time the version is incremented. On the other hand it is probably cleaner to have the directory versioned.) > 3. /usr/lib/ghc should be owned by the packages that install into it, > otherwise it hangs around, if all packages have been removed. Fixed. > 4. Rather than remove the .o files in %preun, they should be %ghost'ed Good point - fixed. > 5. The package.conf.old file should also be %ghost'ed by the > ghc package otherwise, a complete uninstall leaves something > hanging around. Thanks, will fix that too. > 6. The demos should also be packaged. Good idea: I included them in -doc. > 7. rpmlint complains about non-devel packages requiring devel packages. > This should be ignored, otherwise we would have to append -devel > to all packages. Right - I did ponder renaming them all to -devel packages, but then there is the problem of the .o files used by ghci. > 8. rpmlint: > "W: ghc642-glade summary-ended-with-dot Haskell binding of glade for gtk2hs." > Remove the dot. Fixed. > 9. Currently, if someones builds a package requiring the gconf part > of gtk2hs, he will need to require ghc642-gconf, even if he doesn't > care about the exact version of ghc. Requiring ghc-gtk2hs does the > right thing, but only for gtk, glib and cairo. Would > "Provides: ghc-gconf" etc... work? Well that works, but then the problem is that ghc642-gconf will conflict with ghc641-gconf, etc. An alternative might be to make ghc-gtk2hs pull in all the subpackages perhaps? I updated the submission to: http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/ghc-gtk2hs.spec http://people.redhat.com/petersen/extras/ghc-gtk2hs-0.9.10-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review