[Bug 239043] Review Request: libdc1394 - IEEE 1394 based Digital Camera control library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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: libdc1394 - IEEE 1394 based Digital Camera control library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239043





------- Additional Comments From tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  2008-01-16 10:38 EST -------
(In reply to comment #16)
> You are missing to BuildRequires: libtool, doxygen

Added.

> And I don't see where libX11 is used (not in libs nor in example binaries)
> It could be dropped probably.

dropped

> Maybe the autotools regeneration could be dropped, which will also drop the
> libtool needs.

I want to keep it around to not loose the ability to build svn-based packages by
only setting the svn snapshot.

> I would think it is valuable to build the docs into a separate package to avoid
> multilibs problems. It is Also required to split the binaries from the libs for
> the same purpose. (there is a need to check if some binary is mandatory for the
> software to work or if they are only examples).
> See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MultilibTricks
> (specially you could use make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL="%{__install}
> -p" )

I have created -docs and -tools sub-packages to containt the doxygen HTML
documentation and the binaries.

> * about the juju include - as a userland application, we shouldn't search for
> headers from within the kernel-devel. But in this case we want to link from the
> internal version: dc1394/juju (which is done as a falback as kernel-devel isn't
> BR). It might be possible to have it from the kernel-headers when available. 

I don't think I really understood what you mean. What I did now was adding
kernel-headers as a BR and us /usr/include instead of the build-in-mods dir.

> * Not a complete review anyway, I let Rathann do it.
> (will be AFK next week).

I have uploaded the new packages and spec file to
http://fedorapeople.org/~timn/libdc1394/.

Please have a look and let me know if there are still caveats.

The coriander packages have been filed for review as bug #428959.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]