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=810059 --- Comment #8 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-06 03:54:05 EDT --- Basically, its all about the Makefile. Although it's extremely small, it's broken: the dependencies are wrong, make clean is incomplete, it does not respect CFLAGS. I attach a new Makefile. It's so small that a diff makes no sense. It can be used something like this: env CFLAGS="%{optflags} -Wl,-soname=libcrun.so.%{version}" make Doing so, the debuginfo thing should be solver as well as the missing %{optflags} I'm still worried about the packages. Basically, this is just a library and as such the "standard procedure" would be: Base package: opencl-utils: *.so.*, %doc e. g. the example files. Devel package: the header files debug packagge. I just don't see why this should be different. Why package the complete sources? Why have a separate package for for clrun? In particular, packaging sources in the include directory is plain wrong IMHO. If they need to be packaged (why) they should live somewhere else e. g. in /usr/share/opencl-utils or just as %doc. -- 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