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: sdcc - Small Device C Compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226795 jeff@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jeff@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From jeff@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-02 00:24 EST ------- Well, blow me down... I've been working the past few days on a SDCC package as well but hadn't quite gotten my package to the point of being able to post a review request. A few items based upon what I've seen so far (but not a full review yet): 1. The "script-without-shebang" errors can be fixed with this: find . -type f -name \*.c | xargs chmod a-x 2. The zero length file errors can be ignored IMHO, it looks like those files are required for proper functioning, even though they are empty. 3. What about adding "libgc-devel" to the BR and --enable-libgc to the %configure line? From what I saw in the documentation this will help improve memory usage. I don't really know much about SDCC so I don't know if that would mean other tradeoffs. 4. What about adding "latex2html" to the BR and --enable-doc to the %configure file? This would allow the documentation to be included in the package. 5. The devel package doesn't own "%{_datadir}/sdcc". 6. Why remove the emacs files? Why not move them to "%{_datadir}/emacs/site-lisp/". That would make them easier to use if someone wanted to. 7. The main package isn't very useful without the -devel subpackage. Even though it will cause rpmlint to complain, what about having the main package require the -devel subpackage, or even eliminate the -devel subpackage and have just one package (even though that will cause rpmlint to complain even louder). 8. Is this being packaged in preparation for packaging GNU Radio? That's why I was packaging SDCC, but my GNU Radio package is in even less polished shape than my SDCC package. -- 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