[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #35 from Jens Petersen 2009-09-12 10:27:44 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=131064 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #34 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-08-28 10:31:09 EDT --- Franches are named "F-10", "F-11", etc. I've fixed that up. CVS done. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #33 from Zach Oglesby 2009-08-27 04:35:58 EDT --- Sorry about that! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ghc-X11-xft Short Description: Haskell binding to Xft Owners: zoglesby Branches: F10 F11 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #32 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-08-26 18:32:30 EDT --- Please add a cvs template here so we know what you want. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #31 from Jens Petersen 2009-08-25 23:59:04 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=358664) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=358664) deps clean up Please apply these dependency fixes. I know it is a bit tedious doing all this stuff by hand, but let's try to keep our sig packages clean until cabal2spec is smart enough. :) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1634073 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #30 from Zach Oglesby 2009-08-25 12:29:10 EDT --- Fixed, http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.3-2.fc12.src.rpm -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Yaakov Nemoy changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, needinfo? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #29 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-08-25 11:22:41 EDT --- Actually, i take that back. Just fix the description. I was looking over the template again, and i forgot that we put everything in a -devel package. Just fix the description and it's a pass. I was looking at it funny. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752
Yaakov Nemoy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(loupgaroubl...@gm |needinfo?
|ail.com)|
--- Comment #28 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-08-25
10:43:37 EDT ---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.[1]
[yan...@koan ghc-X11-xft]$ rpmlint -iv *{spec,rpm}
ghc-X11-xft.src: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft.src: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-devel.i586: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-devel.ppc: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-devel.x86_64: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-doc.i586: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-doc.i586: E: description-line-too-long This package contains
development documentation files for the ghc-X11-xft library.
Your description lines must not exceed 79 characters. If a line is exceeding
this number, cut it to fit in two lines.
ghc-X11-xft-doc.ppc: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-doc.ppc: E: description-line-too-long This package contains
development documentation files for the ghc-X11-xft library.
Your description lines must not exceed 79 characters. If a line is exceeding
this number, cut it to fit in two lines.
ghc-X11-xft-doc.x86_64: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-doc.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long This package contains
development documentation files for the ghc-X11-xft library.
Your description lines must not exceed 79 characters. If a line is exceeding
this number, cut it to fit in two lines.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.i586: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-prof.i586: E: devel-dependency ghc-X11-xft-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.i586: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ghc-6.10.3/X11-xft-0.3/libHSX11-xft-0.3_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.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.ppc: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-prof.ppc: E: devel-dependency ghc-X11-xft-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.ppc: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.ppc: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ghc-6.10.3/X11-xft-0.3/libHSX11-xft-0.3_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.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.x86_64: I: checking
ghc-X11-xft-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-X11-xft-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-X11-xft-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.10.3/X11-xft-0.3/libHSX11-xft-0.3_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.
11 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 6 warnings.
>>> CHECK --> All normal for GHC packages with one exception. I think
>>> cabal2spec is generating the description errors because i had the same
>>> problem on another review.
n
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
>>> CHECK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
>>> CHECK
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
>>> CHECK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
>>> CHECK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[3]
>>> CHECK
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 must be included in %doc.[4]
>>> CHECK
MUST: The spec file must be written in American
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #27 from Zach Oglesby 2009-08-25 06:22:45 EDT --- Updated http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.3-1.fc12.src.rpm -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(zogle...@zach.tk) | --- Comment #26 from Zach Oglesby 2009-08-24 09:57:24 EDT --- Indeed, sorry we just had a baby and I see to not have enough time in the day, I will try and get it updated today or tomorrow. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(loupgaroubl...@gm ||ail.com) -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #25 from Jens Petersen 2009-08-20 21:40:37 EDT --- Zach, are you going to update the package? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752
Yaakov Nemoy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(oglesb...@gmail.c
||om)
--- Comment #24 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-16
04:22:43 EDT ---
What follows is some IRC chatter over two ways of doing it. Let's go with the
latter. Please explicitely BR the -prof and -doc packages where you have
ghc-*-devel BR'd.
(01.58.36) ( juhp) loupgaroublond: hmm
(01.59.36) ( juhp) sounds "complicated" :)
(02.00.09) ( juhp) if you're going to make -devel require -prof and -doc then
might as well not subpackage ;)
(02.00.49) ( juhp) we also do it for BuildRequires where it counts
(02.01.20) ( juhp) probably we should just drop the switches?
(03.00.20) :: ritek (n=edua...@201.171.111.160) has quit ("��")
(09.54.24) ( loupgaroublond) nah, just the issue is to make sure packages build
properly, either that or we have to explicitly require all the appropriate 'non
devel' packages in a 'devel' situation
(09.56.50) ( juhp) yeah in fact most of the subpackaging is pain
(09.57.10) ( juhp) I am still tempted to unsubpackage doc
(09.57.42) ( juhp) loupgaroublond: but i don't get it: if -devel requires -prof
and -doc then how does subpackaging help you?
(10.00.57) ( loupgaroublond) because -devel is only supposed to contain the
bits in the shared libs necessary to compile other packages
(10.01.03) ( loupgaroublond) the ghc-foo contains the shared libs
(10.01.14) ( loupgaroublond) the *-doc has the haddock stuff, and the -prof has
the profiling extras
(10.01.55) ( loupgaroublond) but if you install the -devel package, we're
assuming you need all those other bits too
(10.04.57) ( juhp) why?
(10.05.10) ( juhp) so then we don't need subpackages
(10.05.21) ( juhp) everything should just be in -devel
(10.07.35) ( loupgaroublond) because sometimes you don't want devel?
(10.07.57) ( loupgaroublond) or i'll just tell jochem to include the -prof and
-doc dependencies
(10.08.20) ( loupgaroublond) anyways, it's a thought
(10.08.25) ( loupgaroublond) there's more than one way to skin a cat though
(10.11.40) ( juhp) maybe I am missing some context
--
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #23 from Jens Petersen 2009-07-16 04:17:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) > This is a dependency issue that i'm also bringing up with Jens Well it would be better if cabal2spec was smart enough to do all the right BuildRequires for dependencies, that would avoid these: so best to test in mock before submitting in the meantime. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #21 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-15 08:17:20 EDT --- Building X11-xft-0.2... [1 of 2] Compiling Graphics.X11.Xrender ( dist/build/Graphics/X11/Xrender.hs, dist/build/Graphics/X11/Xrender.o ) [2 of 2] Compiling Graphics.X11.Xft ( dist/build/Graphics/X11/Xft.hs, dist/build/Graphics/X11/Xft.o ) Graphics/X11/Xft.hsc:57:7: Could not find module `Codec.Binary.UTF8.String': Perhaps you haven't installed the profiling libraries for package `utf8-string-0.3.5'? Use -v to see a list of the files searched for. This is a dependency issue that i'm also bringing up with Jens -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #22 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-15 08:17:44 EDT --- Oh, and it seems there's a new upstream, so could you please rebase against that? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #20 from Zach Oglesby 2009-07-13 19:09:27 EDT --- Updated, sorry for the delay! http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-4.fc11.src.rpm http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #19 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-03 08:20:10 EDT --- And not paying attention, i forgot to mention it also needs to BR ghc-X11 itself. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #18 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-03 08:17:28 EDT --- The package needs to BR ghc-utf8-string too. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Yaakov Nemoy changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loupgaroubl...@gmail.com --- Comment #17 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-07-03 07:52:08 EDT --- Let me take this one over then. Apparently it won't build without the UTF-8 package, which i'm going to take over as a review too. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Yaakov Nemoy changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|oglesb...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-07-01 19:35:48 EDT --- Who is reviewing this and who is submitting it? I see Zach signed up to review it, but he's the one producing packages, which is a bit backwards. Nobody's going to sign up to review this since it's already assigned to Zach, yet the fedora-revlew is not set. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #15 from Zach Oglesby 2009-06-28 22:43:21 EDT --- Updated http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-3.fc11.src.rpm http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oglesb...@gmail.com -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||460974(xmobar) -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #14 from Jens Petersen 2009-06-20 19:24:27 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=348767) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=348767) ghc-X11-xft.spec-1.patch Perhaps I confused you about fullstops in the previous review. Just to clarify, the rule of thumb is no fullstops (periods) in the summary field but fullstops in the description fields: you can follow the example of cabal2spec there. :) -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #13 from Jens Petersen 2009-06-20 19:19:40 EDT --- Zach, you need to include the dependency on libXft explicitly by adding BuildRequires: libXft-devel to the base (src) package and Requires: libXft-devel to the devel subpackage. Unfortunately cabal2spec is not smart enough to do that yet. That should allow the package to build in mock and avoid linking errors etc with the devel package. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(loupgaroubl...@gm | |ail.com)| -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #12 from Jens Petersen 2009-06-20 09:08:56 EDT --- cabal2spec-diff looks ok to me - though you should keep periods in the descriptions, which should be made of sentences. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|NotReady| -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #11 from Zach Oglesby 2009-06-17 21:36:15 EDT --- Updated http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-2.fc11.src.rpm -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen 2009-06-13 04:00:42 EDT --- Can you update your package again based on your experience of the utf8-string review? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #9 from Zach Oglesby 2009-06-07 21:32:19 EDT --- Updated http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-2.fc11.src.rpm -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen 2009-06-03 02:11:49 EDT --- Please update to latest cabal2spec, thanks -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Zach Oglesby changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oglesb...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Zach Oglesby 2009-05-29 17:57:21 EDT --- Here is my spec and srpm http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft.spec http://zoglesby.fedorapeople.org/ghc-X11-xft-0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen 2009-04-25 18:54:34 EDT --- ping? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
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=426752 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ghc-X11-xft |Review Request: ghc-X11-xft |- Haskell bindings to the |- Haskell binding to Xft |Xft, X Free Type interface | |library, and some Xrender | |parts | -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
