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: <ppl-0.9> - <A modern C++ library providing numerical abstractions> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227669 ------- Additional Comments From bagnara@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-10 17:09 EST ------- > And the RPATH is also in the binaries? Ehm, no. How embarassing: I kept looking at the compilation log (seeing the the -rpath option was passed to libtool) without checking again with rpmlint -i. Thanks! >> %build >> CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" ./configure --enable-shared \ > > With ppl-0.9-1.src.rpm the code does not compile with $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. > Something in the configure script overrides the flags with > -W -Wall -g -O2 ... Sorry, I don't understand. Where did you take "CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" ./configure ..."? Are you saying that in the spec file I should replace %build %configure --enable-shared --disable-rpath make with %build CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" ./configure --enable-shared --disable-rpath make ? In configure.ac there is the following: # If we are using GCC we want to compile with warnings enabled. if test x"$GCC" = xyes then CFLAGS="-W -Wall $CFLAGS" fi if test x"$GXX" = xyes then CXXFLAGS="-W -Wall $CXXFLAGS" fi Plus the following code implementing the --enable-optimization configure option. arch=no enableval=standard AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to enable optimizations]) AC_ARG_ENABLE(optimization, AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-optimization], [enable compiler optimizations])) case "${enableval}" in sspeed) AC_MSG_RESULT(sspeed) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer" arch=yes ;; speed) AC_MSG_RESULT(speed) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -O3" arch=yes ;; size) AC_MSG_RESULT(size) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -Os" arch=yes ;; standard | yes) AC_MSG_RESULT(standard) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -O2" ;; mild) AC_MSG_RESULT(mild) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -O1" ;; zero) AC_MSG_RESULT(zero) OPT_FLAGS="$OPT_FLAGS -O0" ;; no) AC_MSG_RESULT(no) ;; *) AC_MSG_ERROR([bad value ${enableval} for --enable-optimization, needs sspeed, speed, size, standard, mild, zero, yes or no]) ;; esac >From what you write I gather this is not good. What can we do to improve the situation? -- 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