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: enlightenment - a next generation desktop shell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448337 ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-07-29 15:05 EST ------- Sorry for late reply.. For -2: * Directory ownership issue - %{_includedir}/%{name}/ is not yet owned by any packages. * pkgconfig issue - For now would you fix enlightenment.pc.in like following? ------------------------------------------------------- ..... Version: @VERSION@ Libs: -L$libdir Libs.private: ..... ------------------------------------------------------- * config.h inclusion - This issue must be fixed. A quick workaround is to include config.h as unique and arch-dependent name and modify e.h so that e.h includes such arch-dependent header file. ref: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MultilibTricks#myautoconf.h_files_with_a_size_in_them Also see %_includedir/openssl/opensslconf.h in openssl-devel. So a example of quick workaround follows: 1. Modify e.h (in the source tarball it is src/bin/e.h) as: -------------------------------------------------------- /* * vim:ts=8:sw=3:sts=8:noexpandtab:cino=>5n-3f0^-2{2 */ #ifndef E_H #define E_H #include "e_config_arch.h" #define USE_IPC #if 0 ......... -------------------------------------------------------- 2. Prepare e_config_arch.h (as %SOURCE? , say %SOURCE1) as -------------------------------------------------------- #ifndef E_CONFIG_ARCH_H #define E_CONFIG_ARCH_H #if defined(__i386__) #include "e_config-i386.h" #elif defined(__ia64__) #include "e_config-ia64.h" #elif defined(__powerpc64__) #include "e_config-ppc64.h" #elif defined(__powerpc__) #include "e_config-ppc.h" #elif defined(__s390x__) #include "e_config-s390x.h" #elif defined(__s390__) #include "e_config-s390.h" #elif defined(__sparc__) && defined(__arch64__) #include "e_config-sparc64.h" #elif defined(__sparc__) #include "e_config-sparc.h" #elif defined(__x86_64__) #include "e_config-x86_64.h" #else #error "This enlightment header files do not work your architecture?" #endif #endif -------------------------------------------------------- 3. Then: -------------------------------------------------------- %prep %setup -q %patch..... install %SOURCE1 src/bin/ ..... ..... %build %configure --disable-static cp -p config.h e_config-%{_arch}.h make %{?_smp_mflags} %install .... make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p' ...... install -cpm 644 %SOURCE0 e_config-%{_arch}.h %{_includedir}/%{name}/ %files ...... -------------------------------------------------------- * multilib conflict - And some reviewers say that shell scripts in foo-devel package should not differ between different architectures (see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MultilibTricks ) Would you _consider_ to fix %name-config.in (in src tarball) like below? ! Note this is _optional_ and _not mandatory_ --------------------------------------------------------- #!/bin/sh prefix=@prefix@ exec_prefix=@exec_prefix@ exec_prefix_set=no libdir=/usr/lib if [ -z $ARCH ] ; then ARCH=$(uname -m) ; fi case $ARCH in x86_64 | ia64 | s390 ) libdir=/usr/lib64 ;; esac usage="\ ..... ..... --libs) libdirs="-L${libdir}" echo $libdirs ;; ...... (and same below) --------------------------------------------------------- -- 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