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 ------- Additional Comments From trond.danielsen@xxxxxxxxx 2007-02-02 06:17 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > > > > > > IMO, all but the sdc-prefixed ones are way too generic. Does this package > > > > support --program-prefix? > > > > > > While I see your point here, I can see using --program-prefix potentially > > > causing problems with dependent packages... > > > > > Would it be better to install everything under /usr/sdcc-i386, as suggested for > > cross compilers? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/CrossCompilers > No. This would conflict with GCC's conventions. > > But what would work is to install the apps somewhere outside of %{_bindir}, > e.g > /usr/lib/sdcc/bin > or > /usr/libexec/sdcc > and to install symlinks or wrapper scripts named "sdcc-<app>" into %{_bindir} > > Other packages wanting to use the "non-prefixed" versions then could apply > PATH=/usr/lib/scdc/bin:$PATH (or similar) to access the unprefixed versions. > FIXED. Binaries are now installed into /usr/libexec/sdcc, and symlinks are created in /usr/bin. Updated spec and srpm files are available at ftp://open-gnss.org/pub/fedora -- 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