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: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 ------- Additional Comments From joost@xxxxxxx 2007-01-09 08:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #27) > Builds this time, and seems to run. Good to hear. > rpmlint to look at: > E: lazarus statically-linked-binary /usr/lib64/lazarus/tools/svn2revisioninc > Why is this static? All freepascal-programs are static. The (released) fpc-compilers don't support dynamic-linking. And for pascal-languages this isn't important in most cases. A pascal program for example is (almost) never linked to glibc. > E: lazarus-debuginfo empty-debuginfo-package > debuginfo package empty, due in part to: > W: lazarus unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/lazarus/lazarus > W: lazarus unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/lazarus/startlazarus > W: lazarus unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/lazarus/lazbuild > etc. Yes, for some strange reason strip doesn't strip those binaries. And I have no idea why not. The rpm-script simply doesn't recognize them as binaries... I'll investigate further > Are the things in %(libdir)/lazarus/debian needed? No. ;) Shall I remove them from the package? > Not a lawyer, but the modified LGPL does seem to give additional permission. > Seems to be in Debian experimental, for what that's worth. Does this need futher > license review? This same license is used by the fpc-package itself. In principle it's LGPL, but since fpc can only link programs static, the LGPL license won't work. That's because the LGPL permits to use libraries, unmodified, in non-GPL applications, but only if they are linked in *dynamical*. The exception/change in this modified LGPL is that you can also link the binary static. -- 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