Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463767 Dodji Seketeli <dodji@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(dodji@xxxxxxxxxx) | --- Comment #12 from Dodji Seketeli <dodji@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-15 15:33:43 EDT --- Sorry for my late reply. The updated spec file is at http://www.seketeli.org/dodji/rpms/cloog/cloog.spec.0.15-0.2.git57a0bc. and the updated srpm is at http://www.seketeli.org/dodji/rpms/cloog/cloog-0.15-0.2.git57a0bc.fc10.src.rpm. Please find below my answers to your review. Thanks. >For -0.2 > >! First of all, you can try to check your package by rpmlint > (in rpmlint package). rpmlint detects some general packaging > issues. Done. I am still getting those two errors, but I am not sure how to fix them: cloog.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libcloog.so.0.0.0 exit@xxxxxxxxxxx cloog-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation I'd appreciate any help there. > >Then: >* Requires >----------------------------------------------------------- >Requires: ppl-devel >= 0.10, gmp-devel >= 4.1.3 >----------------------------------------------------------- > - This should be for cloog-devel package, not for cloog package Fixed. > >* Group > - Group for -devel subpackage should be "Development/Libraries", > not "Development/Library" Fixed. >* %_infodir/dir > - This file must not be installed. Overwriting this file > by this rpm breaks system "info" information. > > * Please remove this file at %install (not %clean) > and remove this file from %files Done. > * And restore the previous %clean Done. >* Shipping static archives > - What I meant is that unless some specific reason static > archive libfoo.a must be removed (as well as libtool .la > file) I guess you meant that for the -devel package. I added an exclude for the .a library as well as for the .la files. > >* calling ldconfig on scriptlet > - When using "%post -p /sbin/ldconfig" (i.e. using /sbin/ldconfig > directly instead of calling bash and executing ldconfig in the > shell script), no other additional scriptlets are allowed. > > i.e. if there is some other scriptlets than /sbin/ldconfig, > you have to write like: >---------------------------------------------------------- >%post >/sbin/ldconfig >/sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/%{name}.info %{_infodir}/dir || : >---------------------------------------------------------- Done. > >* %changelog > - git revision differs between %release and %change.log Fixed. > >? Some header files design flaw > - Well, for example the head of %_includedir/cloog/cloog.h > says: >---------------------------------------------------------- > 40 #ifndef CLOOG_H > 41 #define CLOOG_H > 42 > 43 #ifdef CLOOG_PPL_BACKEND > 44 # define GNUMP > 45 # include<cloog/ppl_backend.h> > 46 #else > 47 # include <polylib/missing.h> > 48 # include<cloog/polylib_backend.h> > 49 #endif >---------------------------------------------------------- > However, where can we tell if CLOOG_PPL_BACKEND is defined > or not (when this package was built) (i.e whether this header > file includes ppl_backend.h or polylib_backend.h)? > build.log shows that when rebuilding this package -DCLOOG_PPL_BACKEND > is used, however installed header files does not save such > information.... How can I fix this ? I mean this is an upstream problem. Do you mean I should append a patch to the package ? I could as well ship the package as is, and submit a patch upstream to fix it ? -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review