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 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-01-19 14:22 EST ------- > Since cmucl *is* a compiler afterall, I think it's ok to include it here. (-: I would tend to agree; I wonder why rpmlint doesn't complain about gcc which does the same thing. Ahhh, it has a specific exception. > 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. I see. Do you plan to switch it over once the package is included? > > - 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. I can give you an account on an x86_64 machine if you like, but I can't help you with PPC. I think the requires-on-release is fixed by replacing the Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} lines by Requires: %{name} = %{version} -- 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
