https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350884 --- Comment #3 from Brandon Nielsen <nielsenb@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- New spec URL: https://bitbucket.org/nielsenb/mspgcc-fedora/raw/3b5371a0a86ce831c5a97deca058f314f3f991e3/msp430-elf-toolchain.spec New SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/nielsenb/mspgcc-fedora/downloads/msp430-elf-toolchain-3.5.0.0-1.src.rpm (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #2) > Some quick drive-by comments: > > I think the package name should be at least msp430-gcc if not > msp430-elf-gcc. If you insist on having gcc as a subpackage then maybe name > the source package msp430-elf-toolchain, but I think that's redundant. > I went with msp430-elf-toolchain for now, since the TI upstream ships gdb with the gcc source. > > %clean section is redundant. > Fixed. > > rm -rf %{buildroot} is redundant at the beginning of %install, too. > Fixed. > > How are these sources different from what's in Fedora? I can see they are > based on gcc-4.9.1, so it would be nice to see the diff between gcc-4.9.1 > and the included sources. > I'll look into this more. It's a little hard to easily get a diff that makes sense since TI bundles so much code. > > A lot of code is bundled, some of which is also packaged in Fedora already > (binutils, dejagnu, elfcpp, gas, gcc, gdb, gmp, gold, gprof, itcl, libmpc, > mpfr, tcl, tk, zlib and all the lib* directories in mspgcc/sources/tools). > > Those that are not used during build should be deleted in %prep and those > that can't be unbundled should be declared using Provides: bundled(foo) = > version. > I now remove everything that isn't required for building as Fedora provides the necessary headers. I also remove everything that I'm pretty sure isn't commonly used when doing MSP430 development. I'm a little confused about adding 'Provides'. Would I do Provides: bundled(msp430-elf-foo) = version? The version of foo I'd provide isn't general use, the object files would be specific to msp430 build targets. Would I instead be better served to add an msp430-elf-foo subpackage? For example, look at how libgcc is handled in the current gcc specfile. -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx