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 2006-06-11 06:27 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > I read up a bit and it does look like this is hopeless on any 64-bit arch. So I > suggest just doing an ExcludeArch and opening the usual tracking bug. Maybe > some 64-bit experts would be able to lend a hand. Ok. > W: q symlink-should-be-relative /usr/bin/gqbuilder > /usr/share/q/gqbuilder/gqbuilder.q In fact this script depends on gnocl (GTK/Gnome bindings for Tcl), which I intend to submit some time. Probably best to remove this for now. > E: q info-dir-file /usr/share/info/dir > Don't package this file. How is it that this file is sometimes created, sometimes not? > Having a build, I can look at the dependency list. It looks like this will pull > in all of TCL and Tk, plus Imagemagick and unixODBC. That's pretty heavy, but > not insane as if it pulled in octave or a web server. By the way, it doesn't > look like you build the Apache module. I doubt it's worth it to do so, > honestly, but you probably want to take that out of the description. The octave module is built, however it isn't linked agains liboctave, so there is no dependency. However using the module requires octave to be present. Should we leave it as is, or create a separate package with the module, that depends on octave? Also, I try to build the apache module as a separate package, with the name q-httpd. -- 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