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: CGAL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199168 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-16 06:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > Actions(In reply to comment #7) > > > E: CGAL-devel script-without-shellbang /etc/profile.d/cgal.sh > > > E: CGAL-devel script-without-shellbang /etc/profile.d/cgal.csh > > > > As far as I know, these rpmlint errors should be ignored. > Nope, these scripts are incomplete. MUSTFIX This is really an ignorable error. These files are sourced and not executed. Most of the files in /etc/profile.d don't have a shebang. > > > - Static libs: > > upstream libcore++. I know that static libraries should be avoided "as far > > as > > possible", in Fedora. Is the upstream devs choice a sufficient reason? > Formally not, but it's sufficient reason for me not to approve a package and > to > classify a package's quality as "low" ;) Although it would be preferable to have dynamic libraries, it is important in my view to have static library for computational packages too, in order to be able to build statically compiled executables to be able to run on any linux. -- 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 [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
