[Bug 194519] Review Request: q - Equational programming language

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

 



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: q - Equational programming language


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194519





------- Additional Comments From gemi@xxxxxxxxxx  2006-06-10 17:00 EST -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is really a packaging of RC2, correct?  I think it would be good to
> indicate that in the version.  According to the naming guidelines, you should
> use q-7.1-0.1.rc2. and increment the second "1" for each RPM release until 7.1
> is released, at which you can call it q-7.1-1.
Ok.

> Unfortunately I'm having trouble building in mock:
> 
> gcc -DYEAR=\"2006\" -DSYSINFO=\"x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu\"
> -DQPATH=\".:/usr/share/q/lib:/usr/lib64/q\" -DQEXEC=\"/usr/bin/q\"
> -DLIBTOOL=\"/usr/lib64/q/libtool\" -DCC=\"gcc\" -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
> -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buf
> fer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -o qcc qcc-qcc.o qcc-qbase.o qcc-sys.o
> qcc-getopt.o qcc-getopt1.o  -lgmp -lcrypt -lutil -lnsl -lm
>
PATH=".:/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin"
> QPATH="../stdlib:../modules/clib:../modules/clib" ./q ./qcwrap.q ./qcwrap.q
> def: error loading module
> Warning: 268 unresolved external symbols
> ! File def, line 297: Value mismatch in definition
> make[2]: *** [qcwrap.c] Error 2 
Maybe this is due to the bundled libtool. Is there policy how to replace this
with the fedora libtool during building?

> Finally, with so many modules packaged, this package is probably giong to have a
> monster dependency list.  Is it possible to split the packaging a bit?  Or are
> you not building all of the modules listed in the %descsription?
Not all modules are built, e.g., dx and ggi are not built. The description
needs to be modified to only included the bundled ones.
I am reluctant to make separate packages. Users normally expect the
advertised functionality and do not want to search for optional packages.




-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]