On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 05:01:08PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 03:38:11PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 03:05:48PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > I've started a page for updating the packaging guidelines. > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OCaml > > > > > > At the moment it's a straight copy of the packaging guidelines except > > > that I've updated 'ocaml-foolib.spec' from my private copy of that > > > file. > > > > > > Some ideas: > > > > > > - how useful is the whole '%opt' stuff now that we have native > > > compilation on every Fedora architecture? > > > > > > - use of chrpath and strip > > > > > > - should we finally distribute ocaml-find-requires/provides with > > > upstream RPM? They haven't changed in a long time. > > > > > > - note about some common rpmlint errors: > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433783 > > > > > > - ISO-8859-1 - should we ban it from *.ml & *.mli files? > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434694 > > > > > > - camlp4/camlp5 syntax extensions are a bit different from a > > > distribution point of view. They usually don't need a -devel > > > package, and they require *.cmo files to be distributed. > > > And sometimes they should be noarch. > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435431 > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435299 > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435293 > > > > And while I remember: > > > > - ocaml-pcre-devel pulls in ocaml-pcre and pcre. > > However it doesn't pull in pcre-devel, so you cannot actually > > 'devel'op software with this package: programs will fail to link > > because of missing -lpcre. This may be a general problem with > > all our packages which use C libs, although for some reason > > I've only hit it with this one. > > And: > > - certain binaries should not be stripped > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435559 And: - Clarify where documentation should go. Currently my practice has been to put just the license file (if any) in the main package's %doc, and the license file plus all other documentation & examples in the devel subpackage. This duplicates (only) the license file, but that seems acceptable since we shouldn't distribute software without its license. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into Xen guests. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
