[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-01-21 00:50:22 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 |ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #14 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Is there a very long propagation time on the git repositories? No, I checked and it seems the git repo was not actually created! The package was added to pkgdb though: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ghc-pcap Not sure what went wrong... Anyway I think it should be fixed now: can you try again? :) -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #15 from Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Jens Petersen from comment #14) Anyway I think it should be fixed now: can you try again? :) Yup, it's working now, thanks. I've populated master, f19 and f20, and here are the Koji builds for them: • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6385444 • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6385442 • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6385392 I'll submit the f19 and f20 packages to Bodhi as soon as it stops timing out for me. Thanks for your help! -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19 -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #17 from Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20 (manually, because fedpkg was timing out). https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc20 -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #18 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Cool - sorry to hear you are having various troubles... generally Fedora infrastructure works pretty reliably. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Jens Petersen from comment #10) (In reply to Philip Withnall from comment #9) My ‘packager’ group permissions e-mail came through 13 hours ago, but apparently it hasn’t propagated to Bugzilla Hmm dunno - maybe try logging out of bugzilla and back in? You should be in the FAS fedorabugs groups at least. Seems it was because I was using different e-mail addresses on Bugzilla and FAS (since my Bugzilla account is much older). I’ve changed my address on Bugzilla and I can see the flag now. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #13 from Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #12) Git done (by process-git-requests). Doesn’t look like it was successful. $ fedpkg clone ghc-pcap Cloning into 'ghc-pcap'... fatal: '/srv/git/rpms//ghc-pcap.git' does not appear to be a git repository fatal: Could not read from remote repository. And http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ghc-pcap.git/ gives a ‘not found’ error too. Is there a very long propagation time on the git repositories? -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #9 from Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- My ‘packager’ group permissions e-mail came through 13 hours ago, but apparently it hasn’t propagated to Bugzilla, so I can’t set the fedora-cvs flag on this bug (as per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests). Here’s the SCM request for ghc-pcap anyway. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ghc-pcap Short Description: A system-independent interface for user-level packet capture Owners: pwithnall Branches: f19 f20 f21 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Philip Withnall from comment #9) My ‘packager’ group permissions e-mail came through 13 hours ago, but apparently it hasn’t propagated to Bugzilla Hmm dunno - maybe try logging out of bugzilla and back in? You should be in the FAS fedorabugs groups at least. Here’s the SCM request for ghc-pcap anyway. BTW there is no need to specify f21 until it branches from master (rawhide). -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432
--- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com ---
- ghc-pcap-devel needs a Requires for pcap-devel
- better to suffix pcap-devel with %{?_isa}
(BTW one way to get these 2 would be to edit pcap.cabal
locally adding extra-libraries: pcap to the Library section
and then running cblrpm spec on it.)
--
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #5 from Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- Thanks for the review. I've updated the .spec file and SRPM here: • Spec URL: http://people.collabora.co.uk/~pwith/packaging/ghc-pcap.spec • SRPM URL: http://people.collabora.co.uk/~pwith/packaging/ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19.src.rpm And here are the new Koji builds for F19, F20 and Rawhide: • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6370921 • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6370927 • http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6370961 I left the %summary alone and expanded the %description with text from the libpcap-devel package. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #6 from Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Jens Petersen from comment #3) If you can update with these minor changes I am happy to approve the package and sponsor you. I would also like to help review bustle (any plans to release it on Hackage?) when you come to submit it for review. Please also copy me on or let me know of any other initial package submissions you do. I've just started the process of getting a Hackage account to release Bustle there. I'll CC you when I create a bug for the Bustle package. :-) The only other package I've got pending review at the moment is for uhttpmock, and is completely unrelated. Review on it seems to have stalled for the moment: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026764 -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #7 from Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Philip Withnall from comment #6) I've just started the process of getting a Hackage account to release Bustle there. Done: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/bustle-0.4.3 (Note that this version doesn't include the pending .desktop file, icon and i18n which I'm still trying to get sorted with the package maintainer. The fact that I don't really know Haskell or Cabal doesn't really help!) -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Philip Withnall from comment #5) • Spec URL: http://people.collabora.co.uk/~pwith/packaging/ghc-pcap.spec • SRPM URL: http://people.collabora.co.uk/~pwith/packaging/ghc-pcap-0.4.5.2-1.fc19.src.rpm Thanks for the update. It would be nice to have an rpm changelog entry for the changes. I left the %summary alone and expanded the %description with text from the libpcap-devel package. Okay you could also put Haskell bindings for libpcap into the summary instead. I don't think it is a blocker, I just felt the current summary is slightly verbose, but maybe it is okay. (In reply to Philip Withnall from comment #7) http://hackage.haskell.org/package/bustle-0.4.3 Cool - congrats! The Requires and BuildRequires look good now. Package APPROVED. I have gone ahead and sponsored you. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com ---
Sounds good.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Unknown or generated. 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/petersen/pkgreview/1026432-ghc-
pcap/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Missing Requires: pcap-devel in devel subpackage. I think it is needed.
I recommend appending %{?_isa} to .*Requires: *libpcap-devel.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 778240 bytes in 37 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: 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 is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Haskell:
[x]: Static libs in devel package
Yay initial Haskell plugin (output editted;)
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
Except issue listed above
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||haskell-devel@lists.fedorap ||roject.org Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com --- Hi - just noticed this! Bustle looks nice... I can probably sponsor you. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 --- Comment #2 from Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk --- (In reply to Jens Petersen from comment #1) Bustle looks nice... I can probably sponsor you. Great, thanks! Would you be able to review the pcap bindings please? I’ve got a mostly-complete Bustle .spec file locally, but I need to finish off some work with the upstream maintainer before I can finish packaging: we’re adding i18n support, a .desktop file and an .appdata file. Once those changes are released, I can finish packaging Bustle itself. -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1026432] Review Request: ghc-pcap - Haskell bindings for libpcap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026432 Philip Withnall bugzi...@tecnocode.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
