Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487521 --- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-03-25 17:41:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Would it make more sense to package those examples as documentation? Or will > this package somehow compile them. If it will, shouldn't it have some sort of > dependency on a compiler? I guess the point is that if you want to package the > example up so that it works (instead of just sticking it in a documentation > directory), you should actually make sure that it's functional. According to > the README, it also wants eog to be present. The examples (and everything else too) works just with the package itself, the Python library accesses the MPI library. Hmm, the eog dependency seems to be only in the mandelbrot example. I wouldn't add eog as a dependency since everything else works without it. Same thing goes for gcc: it's only needed if your software tries to integrate C modules in the parallel Python program. I can put the examples into %doc but that'll cause a bunch of rpmlint warnings since the distinction between executables and libraries is blurry in Python (unexecutable script warnings / missing shebangs / etc). Maybe it's the best choice since it's true that the files in datadir should work straight away. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review