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: curry - Münster Curry compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194011 ------- Additional Comments From gemi@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-06 15:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > The license seems to be essentially identical to the 3-clause BSD license, so I > think License: BSD is appropriate here. Ok. > I had build failures when using parallel make; everything works fine after > disabling parallel make. Sure takes a while to build, though. Ok. > W: curry devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/curry/files.h > > Since this is a compiler, header files are acceptable in the base package. I > wonder, however, if there are libraries or something that applications compiled > by this compiler will need and if it would be reasonable to split those out to a > separate -libs or -runtime subpackage. I do see this massive static library: > 19435080 Jun 6 13:23 /usr/lib64/curry/libcurry_g.a that I suppose is simply > linked to every application. > > Now, static libs are really strongly disliked in Extras, so I'm going to need to > ask for some guidance here. This is in fact similar to ghc package itself, which contains a lot of static libraries. I think, therefore, it is ok. However you can ask the maintainer of ghc in Extras, Jens Petersen (petersen@xxxxxxxxxx), about this. -- 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-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review