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=619355 --- Comment #18 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2011-04-30 17:32:43 EDT --- Hi Jerry, Thanks for the comments so far. New packages: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python26-numpy/python26-numpy-1.5.1-3.el5.src.rpm http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python26-numpy/python26-numpy.spec The easy ones: * The isa tags indeed do nothing on EPEL5 * s/in in/be in/ done. * Added -fno-strict-aliasing. The other ones: Concerning the liblapack in atlas and lapack: I've been reading around the history of this, good news is we can drop the requirement on lapack since indeed everything and more is also in atlas. This also allows the specification of library locations to be dropped in the %build and %install sections as well. They were there from a time after EPEL atlas when lapack in atlas was not including all of lapack, it's just not needed for EPEL5 versions of these packages. The current situation with liblapack is definitely ugly and is detailed in the bug #478856. Hopefully unrelated to this review I added a comment that there may now be a way out of this situation but the fix will come from atlas and lapack and will take time if it comes at all. I'll look at the /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/numpy/lib/_compiled_base.so /lib64/libpthread.so.0 shortly. I noticed you added a look more for the licensing, was it something in particular, I will look more anyway. -- 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