https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045963 --- Comment #13 from Jens Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for following up. (In reply to Pranav Kant from comment #12) > * Why the shared object file provided by the base package is unversioned. I > think there is a bug related to this for all ghc packages, but I can't find > it, right ? Right this is currently how ghc names shared libraries. The filenames are actually "versioned" - it is just that the version comes before the .so extension. I am happy to open a bug for that against ghc but I hope it need not block this review: it is not something we can fix in this package anyway. But note that ghc does not have the notion of major/minor libraries versions - every version bumps needs rebuilds anyway. > If there is nothing like that, we should probably version this, and move the > unversioned one to the -devel package ? I think it might be better to patch ghc to change how it names .so files: need to think a bit more. Basically it is how ghc has named them since it started supporting shared libraries many releases ago now. > * Why there is no -debuginfo package ? I think the similar reason as above > holds here also for ghc packages ? ghc-7.10 should introduce support for dwarf debuginfo I think, so I decided to wait with debuginfo until then - I don't think it is useful currently with ghc-7.8. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review