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: gpc - The GNU Pascal compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181997 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-03 00:25 EST ------- And, amazingly enough, here's an update. The latest available patches get things building against 4.1.2. rpmlint has grown some new warnings in the sixteen months since I originally submitted this package; I've solved most of them and what's left are the following: W: gpc mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 40, tab: line 16) I suppose I could stop using tabs for indentation. I'd do that now but it takes me an hour to build this so I'll get it on the next iteration. W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/crtc.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/crtlinux386.h W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/trapc.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/libgpc.a W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/crtx.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/regexc.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/pipesc.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/crtc.h W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/intlc.c W: gpc devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/gpc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.2/units/crtdjgpp.h This is a compiler, so it's going to end up with various development bits. E: gpc devel-dependency gmp-devel It is not possible to build with one of the units unless gmp-devel is available, and the failure is not terribly elegant. Still, it's not a hard requirement and I suppose could be removed without overt breakage, but I don't see an issue with a compiler having a -devel dependency. gcc has a dependency on glibc-devel, after all. spec: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/gpc/gpc.spec SRPM: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/gpc/gpc-4.1.2_20060325-1.fc7.src.rpm -- 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