[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=471003


Bryan O'Sullivan <bos at serpentine.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #10 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos at serpentine.com>  2009-02-12 01:56:07 EDT ---
Here's my review.

#  MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.

  srpm is clean, binary rpm reports these:

  cabal-install.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bash_completion.d/cabal
  cabal-install.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/bin/cabal

  These are both acceptable.

# MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.

OK.

# MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.

OK.

# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

OK.

# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license [...]

BSD3 == OK.

# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match [...]

OK.

# MUST: license(s) in %doc.

OK.

# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

OK.

# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.

OK.

# MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream [...]

OK.

# MUST: successfully compile and build [...]

OK.

# MUST: architectures in ExcludeArch.

OK.

# MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [...]

OK.

# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.

OK.

# MUST: shared library ldconfig

NA.

# MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable [...]

NA.

# MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.

OK.

# MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.

OK.

# MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.

OK.

# MUST: Each package must have a %clean section [...]

OK.

# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.

OK.

# MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.

OK.

# MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.

NA.

# MUST: %doc must not affect runtime

OK.

# MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.

NA.

# MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.

Exempt.

# MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files [...]

NA.

# MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix [...]

NA.

# MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages [...]

NA.

# MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives [...]

NA.

# MUST: Packages containing GUI applications [...]

NA.

# MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned [...]

NA.

# MUST: %install rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).

OK.

# MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

OK.

# SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text [...]

NA.

# SHOULD: description and summary translations

No.

# SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.

OK.

# SHOULD: binary rpms on all supported architectures.

Tested x86_64 and i386.

# SHOULD: functions as described

OK.

# SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.

OK.

# SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel [...]

NA.

# SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files [...]

NA.

# SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of [...]

This package is APPROVED.

-- 
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.