[Bug 537979] Review Request: ghc-hashed-storage - Hashed file storage support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=537979

--- Comment #20 from Jens Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-02-02 04:55:28 EST ---
(In reply to comment #19)

> Thanks for the info, but I don't see common_summary or common_description used
> there.

Which version of ghc-rpm-macros are you looking at?

> Other warnings/error are false positives, but still rpmlint is part of a
> review and the rpmlint output should be posted.

Agreed

> > The package is for rawhide and requires ghc-6.12.1
> > it will [not] build in f12 without latest ghc and ghc-rpm-macros.

> Then it should have proper versioned BuildRequires. The version numbers may
> only be omitted, if all supported Fedora releases satisfy the versions.

ghc-rpm-macros BR is versioned: later I may want to backport the package
to F12 with updated macros there - then a ghc version would be unnecesary.
ie the latest macros assume ghc-6.12.1 not the package itself per se. 
I suppose ghc-rpm-macros could have a requires on ghc but I was trying
to avoid that I think.

> I just wanted to test if the package builds in mock, and currently 0.3.9 does
> not: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1955760    

You're right, it seems I made a mistake and didn't upload the actual package
that scratch-built in koji... :(

I uploaded
http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/ghc-hashed-storage/final/ghc-hashed-storage-0.3.9-2.fc12.src.rpm
which I believe was the correct package and also what I imported to cvs.
I hope that might satisfy your curiosity. :)


Honesty I am very busy at work right and don't really have time
for a review inquisition but if you feel great malpractice and
incompetence took place here you can reopen.

I think we got absorbed in the license question and then Lozenzo
forgot to confirm that that package builds, but it was fixed anyway
before importing so not a big deal IMHO.

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]