Dean Glazeski wrote: > Magnus Lundin wrote: >> Dean Glazeski wrote: >>> openocd.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary >>> /usr/lib64/openocd/ecos/at91eb40a.elf >>> openocd.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section >>> /usr/lib64/openocd/ecos/at91eb40a.elf >>> openocd.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package >>> /usr/share/openocd/contrib/libdcc/example.c >>> openocd.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package >>> /usr/share/openocd/contrib/libdcc/dcc_stdio.c >>> openocd.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package >>> /usr/share/openocd/contrib/libdcc/dcc_stdio.h >>> openocd.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/info/openocd.info.gz >> I think : >> >> The libddc files are for building target dcc implementations, and >> nothing in this list is used by the actual running openocd image on >> fedora. So this is really reference materials for developers. That >> might help you decide where to place them. > Does this mean I can just remove them and be happy? Doing that > definitely makes my life much simpler ;). Unless I hear otherwise, > I'll rebuild the RPM without these later tonight (its 7pm where I'm > at) and I'll throw the RPM up for review with Fedora tomorrow. Thanks! > > // Dean Glazeski I have no strong opinion but probably they should be included and go somewhere like /usr/lib/openocd/share/contrib or /usr/share/openocd/contrib/. In the neighboorhood of where all the target cfg files live . This is a bit dictated by Fedora policies.
Regards, Magnus _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
