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: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186566 ------- Additional Comments From matthias@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-03-30 11:26 EST ------- Well, trying to rebuild was yet another story :-) - Why force CC=gcc? It's the default with GNU make, isn't it? - You patch the makefile in the install section, but don't use "make install"... you should document that (with a quick comment), since it's to fix the Makefile's validity! - CFLAGS wasn't set to use the optflags. - bzip2-devel build requirement was missing Maybe others... I've modified your patch and made changes to the spec : http://ftp.es6.freshrpms.net/tmp/extras/bsdiff/ I've taken the approach to "heavily" patch the Makefile instead of manually installing the files, since if in a later version the Makefile is modified to build more binaries, they won't get missed, and if it's in a way that the patch doesn't apply cleanly anymore, you'll instantly know and give it the attention it requires :-) One could even go one step further and also create the parent directories inside the Makefile instead of before calling make install... why not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
