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: GTS - Gnu Triangulated Surface Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192363 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-19 08:42 EST ------- OK, now to the nasty parts (Gts's sources are quite dirty ;) ): 1. gts-config is buggy: Compare this (buggy): $ ./gts-config --cflags -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include $ ./gts-config --libs -L/usr/lib -lgts -lglib-2.0 -lm to this: $ pkg-config --cflags gts -pthread -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include $ pkg-config --libs gts -pthread -Wl,--export-dynamic -lgts -lgthread-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 I'd propose to patch gts-config to behave as a wrapper to the corresponding calls to pkg-config, at least for --cflags and --libs, or to patch out the -I/usr/include rsp. -L/usr/lib by brute force. 2. The package's Makefiles are broken. They explictily pass -I$(includedir) through INCLUDES. This overrides the system include path and can cause nasty side-effects. 3. Building the packages causes GCC to emit quite a significant number of "punned pointer/strict-alignment warnings". These are likely to break the package at run-time, esp. on 64bit platforms. Also worth noting is the configure script playing tricks with CFLAGS. AFAIS, they seem to be harmless at least on FC5/i386. So, be prepared to watch PRs coming in ;) I consider 1. to be a MUST-fix, 2. to be a "I recommend to fix it" and 3. headsup. APPROVED, provided you fix 1. I am going to attach a patch to address issue 2. to this PR. [Besides this, this package is one of those packages applying the weird (IMO sense-free) Drepper-style shared library names. As this package is an ordinary library, I am not going to fret over this, this time.] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/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 Fedorafirstname.lastname@example.org http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review