Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cmucl: CMU Common Lisp compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166796 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-01-19 14:02 EST ------- Thanks. > W: cmucl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/cmucl/internals.h Since cmucl *is* a compiler afterall, I think it's ok to include it here. (-: > - The license. Looks like a mix of PD and MIT. I'll fix that. > - The spec includes two separate build methods. Are they both needed? method 1: use included/internal cmucl for bootstrap method 2: use (previous) rpm-built cmucl for bootstrap. Obviously, at least the first iteration for inclusion in Extras will have to be method 1. > - rpmlint complains "W: cmucl-extras no-documentation" I'll see if I can find some. (-: > - ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} - Is there no portability at all to x86_64 or PPC? Yes, no. It can theoretically work, but there's no bootstrap binary available from upstream, nor do I have any x86_64 or ppc box of my own to attempt to make one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
