https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040517 --- Comment #64 from Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@xxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Paulo Andrade from comment #63) > I did a normal rpmbuild and installed it, and a fedora-review > from generated srpm with my initial proposed patch, to ensure > it was building. > Some considerations: > > 1) I believe none of the installed Makefile files are required > (or functional): > $ find /usr/share/julia/ -name Makefile > /usr/share/julia/test/perf/micro/Makefile > /usr/share/julia/test/perf/shootout/Makefile > /usr/share/julia/test/perf/Makefile > /usr/share/julia/test/Makefile > /usr/share/julia/examples/Makefile Right, these only work from inside the source tree anyway. I've even removed the perf suite, which does not work when installed, and contains a few files with non-MIT licenses. > 2) Is it really required to install /usr/share/julia/test ? > I checked it, and apparently must call the runtests.jl, I > did not change the environment, but apparently not everything > was fine: [...] Yeah, currently the backtrace test is failing with LLVM 3.4 (https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8099). I think it's still better to ship this file, hopefully this will get fixed soon enough. (FWIW, this file can be called by Base.runtests().) > 3) Can it be changed to install documentation in %_docdir? > All documentation is under /usr/share/julia Yes, I've filed a bug upstream, and for now I move the files manually: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8367 > 4) I believe there is something wrong with the documentation. It > should install processed documentation. I try to build it > manually, by switching to the doc subdir I see this: [...] > So, I believe just the hack to create juliadoc/juliadoc/__init__.py is not > enough. Yes, I've filed this in the same upstream issue. I'd say for now let's install the .rst files, which are readable if not pretty, and wait for upstream to make it possible to install HTML files properly. > 5) It has been commented before, but it really would be better to > have a versioned .so under %_libdir; subdirectories usually are > modules, and, usually are ok. The problem is, Julia has not yet committed to API stability, so there's no versioning upstream, and if I invented one I would need to change the SOVERSION for every new release. I'm not sure it's worth it. What do you think? New version: Spec URL: http://nalimilan.perso.neuf.fr/transfert/julia.spec SRPM URL: http://nalimilan.perso.neuf.fr/transfert/julia-0.3.0-4.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review