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: OpenEXR_CTL - A simplified OpenEXR interface to CTL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=403741 ------- Additional Comments From kwizart@xxxxxxxxx 2008-01-09 10:31 EST ------- About the Capitalization problem, I would say it's strange but it have some sense... I think the real package names are OpenEXR but because it can also be compiled on win32 they left the capitalization... Actually i'm close to have OpenEXR_Viewers ready for review and the package name (defined in configure.ac) is OpenEXR_Viewers which means they install doc in %{_datadir}/doc/OpenEXR_Viewers-%{version}. same are the pkgconfig files that are named OpenEXR.pc CTL.pc and OpenEXR_CTL.pc here. About the pkgconfig problem (do you have the pkgconfig patch I've added later?): Because not all libs are used when linking there is lot of unused-direct-shlib-dependencies (rpmlint OpenEXR-libs on installed files ). I would say it would be interesting to clean them. There were also a undefined-non-weak symbol (fixed by the pkgconfig patch) that prevent it to be linked from OpenEXR_Viewers...(CTL libs was missing). I first thought it was due to the CTL 1.4.1 been used with OpenEXR 1.6.0 (instead of 1.6.1). But it seems to work. So I wonder if it worth the case to have OpenEXR updated to 1.6.1 in F-8 (seems bugfixes), What do you think about updating OpenEXR for F-8 ?! The FE-LEGAL has been discussed in http://bugzilla.redhat.com/357461 Tom said it was "Free, but GPL incompatible". -- 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, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review