Re: pvm packaging guidelines violations?

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

 



On Fri, 30 May 2014 11:45:11 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:

> First let me say that if anyone wants to be the primary maintainer of pvm
> please step up! I only need it as a dependency.
> 
> While fixing the build for rawhide due to a tcl/tk update I had to look at
> the spec file and it was horrifying (ok, I'm exaggerating a bit).
> 
> The sources are extracted directly into the buildroot and then built in
> place. Also, it is "installed" (if you can call it that) into /usr/share
> even though it includes static libraries and binaries (which are later
> symlinked into /usr/bin)
> 
> So questions:
> 
> 1. Is this even legal?
> 2. Should this package go through a re-review?

The original "Merge Review" was closed after five years of nobody
showing interest in it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/226327

Rather than reopening that old ticket it would always be possible
to open a new one, though. ;)

> 3. Can the install location  be changed at this point? Other distros seem
> to install into /usr/lib{,64} and symlink the binaries from there.
> 
> There are also a large number of patches, some of which for secondary
> arches so I don't think I'm the right person to lead the charge here....
> Any volunteers?
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux