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=529404 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-19 17:02:35 EDT --- New URLs: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/cvc3/cvc3.spec http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/cvc3/cvc3-2.1-2.fc11.src.rpm I have made the following changes: - The Java code is now built (it required a little patching to get the JNI code to build). - The %makeinstall macro is now used. - The empty PNG is a result of dot segfaulting on some really big input. For now, I'm letting it segfault and just removing the empty file. Long term, I'll try to get dot to generate good input, or make doxygen stop asking dot to process that file. - The unstripped library was due to the .so file not having the executable bits turned on. This is now fixed. - The files with missing " symbols are patched, so doxygen no longer complains. - The API documentation is now in a separate -doc package. I am not going to touch the useless rule warnings generated by bison, as I'm not certain I can do so without damaging the grammar files. We should report this upstream and see if they can fix it, though. I initially added the %check section that you suggested. However, when I enabled Java support, %check stopped working because it couldn't find the JAR files. There's probably an easy fix for that, but I haven't had time to pursue it yet. The minisat code does appear to be related somehow to that in the minisat2 package, but it differs signficantly. The minisat2 package supplies only a binary, not a library, so I couldn't link with it in any case. Even if it did supply a library, I am uncertain of the significance of the differences between the two code bases. How do you suggest I proceed on this point? -- 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