[Bug 542765] Review Request: libghemical - Libraries for the Ghemical chemistry package

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542765

Christian Krause <chkr@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |182235(FE-Legal)

--- Comment #12 from Christian Krause <chkr@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-15 18:59:39 EDT ---
Sorry for the late response.

(In reply to comment #11)
> http://www.five-ten-sg.com/libghemical.spec
> http://www.five-ten-sg.com/libghemical-2.99.1-14.fc12.src.rpm   
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2103279
> 
> buildrequires gcc-gfortran, since it needs libgfortranbegin in the link.    

Thanks for the new package and the bug fixes, here is the update of my review:

* spec file written in English and legible: OK
* BuildRequires: OK
* files section: OK

* compilation: TODO
Thanks for fixing the issue, the library looks now good. 
Probably it would be better to split the patch into two files: one for using
atlas and the 2nd one for fixing the compile issue.

There is one minor remaining issue: the pkg-config file still contains lots of
uneeded libraries and also references to the current compiler directory which
prevent compiling anything against libchemical just by using this pkg-config
file:

echo "void main() {}" > a.c && gcc `pkg-config --libs libghemical` -o a a.c

/tmp/ccZEt1Bd.o: In function `main':
a.c:(.text+0x0): multiple definition of `main'
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-redhat-linux/4.4.3/../../../libfl.a(libmain.o):(.text+0x0):
first defined here
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-redhat-linux/4.4.3/../../../libfl.a(libmain.o): In function
`main':
(.text+0x19): undefined reference to `yylex'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

If the Libs variable in libghemical.pc would only contain "-L${libdir}
-lghemical" everything would work fine.

* License & code vs. content: TODO
Thanks for asking upstream. I feel that there is no problem, but I don't think
I have the knowledge for the final decision. Let's get the final OK from
FE-LEGAL:

@spot: This package contains a number of data files which are needed for
chemical calculations of chemical bindings, etc.

On set of the files has the following license:
" The files in this directory were downloaded from:
        http://www.amber.ucsf.edu/amber/dbase.html
At the download page there was the following copyright notice:

As has always been the case, the parameter information in the above file is
in the public domain, and may be redistributed or used in other programs. Any
such use should include proper citations, and any changes in the parameters
should be prominently noted."

and for the other one upstream gave the statement in comment #9. Based on these
statements and that other distributions (like Debian) have no issues, I assume
there is no problem.

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

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