https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069257
--- Comment #31 from Till Hofmann <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #30) > For example, if you wanted to add the optional gmp/mpfr features, the patch > would need to be adjusted to compile the extra sources into the library > *and* install the extra headers, too. > > That's a big of a chicken'n'egg problem. Once you decide on which features > to include in the library, they cannot simply be turned on/off in the same > way as when using fparser as a copylib (with modifications to fpconfig.hh > possibly). True, and that's why they don't include any build system upstream. As you said earlier: > It's not a big issue. Either add the Requires or not would work. In my > opinion, currently it would be cleaner, if no such dependencies were added. But I don't see how this changed by using autotools? True, the build system doesn't support MPFR/GMP anymore, but didn't we decide to omit this feature anyway? I guess before, MPFR/GMP features were included if MPFR or GMP were installed on the build system, but that was rather uninentional (otherwise I would have kept the BuildRequires). > The attached patch is just an example of a basic framework to get started. OK, but I don't see what is missing exactly? Do you want me to include the possibility to turn MPFR/GMP on/off? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
