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=464074





--- Comment #48 from Conrad Meyer <kon...@tylerc.org>  2009-01-22 16:08:11 EDT 
---
(In reply to comment #47)
> Using static libraries instead of shared libraries isn't a matter of
> preference.
> Upstream should be educated to use shared library. Unless there is a very
> imperial technical reason (circle dependency, ABI un-stability, etc).
> 
> This package shouldn't make use of a static library instead of creating a
> shared object.

The last update from upstream was in early 2008 and the email address bounces.

> Futhermore src-mathlink and src-mathlink2 aren't compiled

Are these useful?

> Again, there is no reason for such package to install theses headers in
> /usr/include instead of /usr/include/cddlib to prevent namespace issues.

Agreed.

> Also, Adding pkgconfig support should have been done to ease the
> -I/usr/include/cddlib addition.

Unneeded work considering how many dependencies this library will have.

> cddlibman.pdf should have been generated from the .tex file.

Done.

> How do you run the example ?

$ gcc /usr/share/doc/cddlib-devel-094f/src/testcdd1.c -I/usr/include/cddlib
-lcdd
$ ./a.out

When it asks you for a file, pass one of the files in
/usr/share/doc/cddlib-devel-094f/examples/*.ine.

-- 
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@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

Reply via email to