https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871205

Rich Mattes <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|[email protected] |
                   |project.org                 |



--- Comment #4 from Rich Mattes <[email protected]> ---
Hi Mario,

The build type is set to none because CMake's default build flags for release
and relwithdebinfo aren't that useful: they just duplicate some of Fedora's
optflags.  Upstream doesn't set any custom build flags at the moment, but I'll
go ahead and switch it to RelWithDebInfo anyway.

I've submitted a ticket upstream[1] asking about adding library versioning.  In
the meantime, I've got an update to 0.2.8 here:

Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/urdfdom/urdfdom.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/urdfdom/urdfdom-0.2.8-1.fc19.src.rpm

It requires urdfdom-headers-0.2.3, which I've just built and submitted for f19,
f18 and el6 (it's also built in rawhide).

$ rpmlint ./urdfdom.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/urdfdom-*
urdfdom.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/liburdfdom_sensor.so
liburdfdom_sensor.so
urdfdom.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/liburdfdom_world.so
liburdfdom_world.so
urdfdom.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/liburdfdom_model_state.so
liburdfdom_model_state.so
urdfdom.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/liburdfdom_model.so
liburdfdom_model.so
urdfdom.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary check_urdf
urdfdom.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary urdf_mem_test
urdfdom.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary urdf_to_graphiz
urdfdom-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings.

[1] https://github.com/ros/urdfdom/issues/6

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Y5BGvkLcUz&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to