[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05 10:23 EST --- Buildrequires: automake, libtool Requires: pkgconfig, automake Buildrequires: libtool will be enought as it will bring autoconf automake But Adding Requires automake isn't needed by ETL itself. Fix that and i will approve the package. (it finally built with synfig and F-9 x86_64) might be a bug with a dependency or fixed in newer version... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05 18:29 EST --- http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL/ETL.spec http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL/ETL-0.4.11-4.fc9.src.rpm Removed automake and automake Buildrequires: libtool Requires: pkgconfig Cheers Nicolas for your help. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-01 05:32 EST ---
Ok this time the build went fine on x86_64.
(either synfig or others dependencies have been fixed probably)
So we are close.
About ETL, it still miss BuildRequires libtool
and /usr/bin/ETL-config /usr/include/ETL/etl_profile.h need to have a timestamps
reference like:
touch -r ChangeLog $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/ETL-config
touch -r ChangeLog $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/ETL/etl_profile.h
As they are already the same files but have different timestamps
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-01 07:04 EST --- http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL/ETL-0.4.11-3.fc9.src.rpm http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL/ETL.spec Hopefully done http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=591446 -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-16 16:24 EST --- The problem isn't with ETL but with synfig using ETL. I cannot approve ETL if the dependent package that is supposed to be useful fails. (at least on Rawhide x86_64) I will give a retry... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-16 20:47 EST --- Can you paste the build errors or a link to them? -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-13 19:11 EST --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=564701 I don't see any issue? Sorry my computer died and I'm now using my laptop instead of my other box. Well PSU died and I haven't fixed it as of yet. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 09:32 EST --- (In reply to comment #41) ETL/synfig/synfigstudio don't use that function. From google it looks like it was part of glib at one point but was renamed. Maybe there is a missing -lstdc++ somewhere ? -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-13 08:21 EST --- Is this really an issue the following code. /* Define to the address where bug reports for this package should be sent. */ #define ETL_BUGREPORT http://synfig.org/Bugs; /* Define to the full name of this package. */ #define ETL_NAME Extended Template Library /* Define to the full name and version of this package. */ #define ETL_STRING Extended Template Library 0.4.11 /* Define to the one symbol short name of this package. */ #define ETL_TARNAME ETL /* Define to the version of this package. */ #define ETL_VERSION 0.4.11 -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-12 10:43 EST --- /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.41093: line 40: autoreconf: command not found Missing BR: automake But the etl_profile.h is still here! In my mind it should be removed and the tests for definitions should be done by synfig. This would remove the need of using autotools for ETL and thus, produce a clean noarch package for ETL (without pkgconfig nor ETL-config needs as it just need to find where are the headers, use -lpthread and the proper HAVE_ definitions for ETL). On the other side: this is a special case here as no lib is built. So, removing any config.h-like file is like removing it after the configure step and before building the software on the usual case. In this case, this is senseless and in my mind we may keep this etl_profile.h ... Others point of view can be expressed... for now, T'm test building synfig for F-9 with this package... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-12 17:29 EST --- For me provided I can build synfig and synfig-studio is all I'm concerned about. Synfig-studio is not up for review as of yet because I want etl and synfig ready before I bring that for review. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-12 17:52 EST --- I forgot to say that it has failed to build on F-9 x86_64 undefined reference to g_uri_get_scheme collect2: ld returned 1 exit status I don't knwo where this symbol is present, i don't seems to have it available on my system. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-12 20:32 EST --- ETL/synfig/synfigstudio don't use that function. From google it looks like it was part of glib at one point but was renamed. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-10 06:47 EST --- Ping -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 05:00 EST --- I originally had the spec file as ETL.spec but changed it to ETL-devel as part of the review. Ralf if I removed the HAVE_* would that work since the requirements for the packages are there anyway the HAVE seem to be doing the packagers job. The configure finds it anyways. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 06:06 EST --- Ralf it seems like the only file is etl_profile.h [EMAIL PROTECTED] ETL-0.4.11]$ grep -r '#define HAVE_ *' ./* ./configure:#define HAVE_LIBUSER32 1 ./configure:#define HAVE_LIBKERNEL32 1 ./configure:#define HAVE_LIBPTHREAD 1 ./configure:#define HAVE_VSNPRINTF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_FORK 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_GETTIMEOFDAY 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_INTTYPES_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_KILL 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_LIBPTHREAD 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_MEMORY_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PIPE 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_CREATE 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INIT 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_YIELD 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SCHED_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SCHED_YIELD 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SSCANF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_STDINT_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_STDLIB_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_STRINGS_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_STRING_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SYS_STAT_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SYS_TIMES_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SYS_TIME_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SYS_TYPES_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_UNISTD_H 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VASPRINTF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VSNPRINTF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VSPRINTF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VSSCANF 1 ./ETL/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE___CLONE 1 ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_GETTIMEOFDAY ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_H ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_SCHED_H ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_PTHREAD_CREATE ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VASPRINTF ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VSNPRINTF ./ETL.pbproj/etl_profile.h:#define HAVE_VSPRINTF -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 06:57 EST --- Created an attachment (id=297176) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=297176action=view) profile cleanup Ralf would this work provided the other etl_profile.h are removed. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 07:03 EST --- bleh ignore this it needs more testing doesn't compile with synfig -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 07:32 EST --- I think it works...Ralf can you verify that this no longer has a blocker. http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL.spec http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-0.4.11-2.fc9.src.rpm -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-06 04:24 EST --- That is correct. It is fixed in cvs currently in upstream. They are planning a release shortly. Hence I haven't done anything yet. I was hoping this would work so it would be a simple upgrade/update. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-06 04:55 EST --- My bad, upstream has released a new version. I've re-packaged it. http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel-0.4.11-1.fc9.src.rpm http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel.spec -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-07 00:16 EST --- Two show stoppers: 1. The header files are still as dirty as they used to be. This package's headers are polluted with HAVE_* defines. 2. Why is this package called ETL-devel? The package's name is ETL = ETL.spec, ETL-version-release.src.rpm There is nothing wrong in letting this ETL.src.rpm only build an ETL-devel.rpm. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-05 18:29 EST --- oups! I was close to ping you but actually you should have ping me ! so i'm testing 0.04.10-3 but 0.01.11 is here... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-05 19:21 EST --- synfig failed with on Rawhide with gcc43 blur.cpp:134: error: explicit template specialization cannot have a storage class As synfig is a known package using ETL-devel I cannot approve ETL-devel until synfig is fixed. starting prelimary review of synfig -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 06:21 EST --- From the package point of view: This seems fine. I would just remove ETL-config as this will lead to mutliarch conflict (as Ralf state). As synfig do not use it, this shouldn't matter) From the code point of view: When trying to build synfig I've had: /usr/include/ETL/_surface.h:196: error: 'memcpy' was not declared in this scope So you need to add the missing include (cstring in this case). One note about synfig, there are a lot of missing BR (see the Configuration Summary) - That would be fine to add them when they are available within Fedora. There is also a libavcodec optionnal requirement, and maybe it would be good to provide it as a plugin form third part repository... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 06:41 EST --- ETL-config has been rewritten as a pkg-config wrapper (see patch above). _surface.h error has a one-line fix (#include cstring) and was fixed in SVN ages ago thanks to Debian. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 06:52 EST --- Upstream is planning on releasing a new version at the end of this month early next month to be compliant with gcc43. As F-9 will contain gcc43 I will wait till the new release and repackage for that. The wrapper is included in upstream already so I will be closer to upstream. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 06:51 EST ---
OK! so about gcc4.3.0 the packager also need to backport the patch.
(as we now have pre gcc 4.3.0 in rawhide).
About the ETL-config, since this file is generated at a configure step, packager
will need to set the same timestamps from a reference file for all arches .
This can be done using touch -r any_reference_file
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/ETL-config
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 11:49 EST --- As you like, but this patch is often trivial, and that would be a good thing to have backported and tested so we could start review synfig. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-02 17:59 EST --- Actually you make a fair point since there are still 2 other packages linked to this one. http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel-0.04.10-3.fc8.src.rpm http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel.spec Updated with the patch. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-23 19:17 EST --- I was able to build synfig with Debian's g++ 4.3 fine, but not synfigstudio due to this bug in sigc++: http://bugs.debian.org/456971 When that is resolved, I'll try it again. If Fedora has a fix for it, please try building synfigstudio with it. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-23 19:53 EST --- Have you checked your defines to make sure they don't clash with other packages. The example given was in your etl_profile_.h.in ETL-config This is a blocker, because it prevent you from installing 386 and the x86_64 packages in parallel. quoting from ralf btw: Your remark had caused me to have a closer look into the headers. They are scattered with autoheader defines which all will trigger the same issue as outlined above. In reference to the clash's if you change your defines they should be fine. The etl-config issue as well. One other question why does it need a static library since we remove it after building? -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-23 20:26 EST --- Defines: not yet, help welcome. ETL-config is generated from ETL-config.in at configure time. Removing it upstream would be OK, since synfig/studio don't use it as far as I can see. Not sure which static library you mean, ETL is just a bunch of C++ templates. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-23 23:52 EST --- Created an attachment (id=292726) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=292726action=view) Rewrite ETL-config as wrapper to pkgconfig This patch implements $(bindir)/ETL-config as a wrapper around pkg-config. c.f. my previous comment. It avoids hardcoding config values into files inside of non-multilib'ed dirs. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-23 23:49 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) Defines: not yet, help welcome. Provided how this package is designed, fixing this is close to impossible. One way to work around this would be to rename all defines and to use a second, private, manually written autoheader, which would be installed into $(libdir) instead of $(includedir). Packages using ETL then would be required to use -I$(libdir)/ETL to pickup this header (c.f. how glib2 and gtk2 install their headers) ETL-config is generated from ETL-config.in at configure time. This is pretty easy to fix. The key is not to store any configuration info in files which are not in multilib'ed dirs. I.e. not to store @libdir@ in $(bindir)/ETL-config, but to let $(bindir)/ETL-config pick up this info from a different location. A common trick is to implement $(bindir)/*-config as wrappers around pkgconfig. (*.pc's are being stored into $(libdir)/pkgconfig (libdir is multilib'ed. e.g. */lib on ix32 and */lib64 on ix64) Removing it upstream would be OK, since synfig/studio don't use it as far as I can see. Exactly this is the cause of your problems with the #defines. If they were, you could move these headers into $(libdir) and let ETL.pc use Cflags= -I$(libdir)/ETL or similar. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-24 00:31 EST --- Patch committed to synfig svn. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-24 01:28 EST --- http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel.spec http://mwiriadi.fedorapeople.org/packages/ETL-devel/ETL-devel-0.04.10-2.fc8.src.rpm -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-22 04:32 EST --- Forgot to ask you to edit this to indicate the Fedora package names of the build-dependencies: http://synfig.org/Build_instructions -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-22 04:28 EST --- Hi, I'm one of the people helping with development upstream. We inherited the synfig source code - it was GPLed after being proprietary: http://synfig.org/History We'd appreciate it if you could come to #synfig on irc.freenode.net, explain the issues that need fixing and help us to fix them. Look for either dooglus or pabs3. Alternatively please file bugs/patches in the tracker linked here: http://synfig.org/Bugs Once ETL/synfig/synfigstudio are in Fedora, please edit these pages: http://synfig.org/Download http://synfig.org/Bugs -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-22 04:36 EST --- I don't know if you got my email before. There are few issues with etl as you can see from this thread. The bugs listed are in the thread itself if you would like to comment. At the moment the package is on hold and will not make it into Fedora without the fixes to the code listed above. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-22 00:05 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) And i would give a chance to have an answear from upstream... Yes, this is an issue that should be fixed upstream. There is also the question to add some headers without any libs... I wonder if this make sense, specially if only one package use it. Does theses headers could be merged with another package ? I don't understand this remark. Could you elaborate? -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 06:32 EST --- starting review -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 07:39 EST --- should be read: * pkg-config file: ETL.pc - it Requires only -lpthread koji scratch build request at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=350044 Looking at the headers looks differents or same for each arches... -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 07:32 EST ---
* You need to download the sources with wget -N in order to prevent timestamps
changes
-rw-rw-r-- 1 builder builder 335182 jan 11 16:37 ETL-0.04.10.tar.gz
instead of
-rw-rw-r-- 1 builder builder 335182 oct 10 04:37 ETL-0.04.10.tar.gz
* if the package name is ETL-devel, the spec file have to be ETL-devel.spec
* License is GPLv2+ - good
* The package do not seems to be arch independent but only because it has ETL.pc
in /usr/lib64 on lib64 system - seems strange
* you need to use: make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL=install -p
-rw-r--r-- 1 builder builder 1249 jan 15 12:39 value
instead of
-rw-r--r-- 1 builder builder 1249 mar 16 2007 value
* etl_profile.h is a config.h kind of file. usually it shouldn't be installed.
same as etl_config.h - If upstream claims they are really needed, then it might
be interesting to keep a timestamps reference from a file to avoid multiarches
conflict (but only if they are the same on i386 and x86_64, and also ppc and
ppc64 at least). Might be safe to remove ETL-config then. (and to patch
dependant apps to use pkg-config if needed).
see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MultilibTricks
* The package bundle no library - as such it is not needed to have
/sbin/ldconfig in post and postun.
* pkg-config file: ETL.pc - it Requires only
But includedir remains includedir=/usr/include instead of
includedir=/usr/include/ETL as such they is a need to check if headers of
dependent packages have ETL/spline or only spline (for example). Might need to
test package that links against it... specially if others libs are missing.
* As the package isn't marked as noarch (might evaluate if it could be with a
tweak for pkg-config) a debuginfo is generated. If the package remains arch
dependant, we might consider to use %define debug_package %{nil}. If the package
could be noarch, then it might need to work on x86 x86_64 ppc ppc64 (and maybe
others arch). then no debuginfo package will be created.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 08:54 EST --- Blocker: /usr/bin/ETL-config is not multilib ready. I recommend to re-write it as a wrapper around pkg-config. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 09:41 EST --- Thx for your advice Ralf: Actually the only difference between ppc and x86_64 (for example and expect for the pkgconfig path for libdir is: diff -uNr usr/include/ETL/etl_profile.h usr-x86_64/include/ETL/etl_profile.h --- usr/include/ETL/etl_profile.h 2008-01-15 13:49:01.0 +0100 +++ usr-x86_64/include/ETL/etl_profile.h2008-01-15 13:49:01.0 +0100 @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ /* Define to 1 if your processor stores words with the most significant byte first (like Motorola and SPARC, unlike Intel and VAX). */ -#define WORDS_BIGENDIAN 1 +/* #undef WORDS_BIGENDIAN */ /* define if the vsnprintf function is mangled */ /* #undef vsnprintf */ -- But this define isn't used elsewhere than in etl_profile.h. If we can consider this as a noach package, then we might need to rip out these lines... Instead of using ETL-config, i was think about having this: (see attachement) -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 09:41 EST --- Created an attachment (id=291713) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=291713action=view) workaround for the pkgconfig on lib64 system -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 09:58 EST --- I have sent an email upstream to get some further information. I think it is prudent to talk to upstream to see where they view the current situation and what the best method is to go about sorting it out. If nothing comes of it I'll start working on patching what I can and trying to fix things. Thanks Nic for the updated Spec file that will come in handy. What I might do to get further information is to actually scan the source files of synfig to see what else is needed from in here as per one of your points then go from there. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 10:44 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) Thx for your advice Ralf: The killer is this: -- i386/bin/ETL-config 2008-01-15 13:39:03.0 +0100 +++ x86_64/bin/ETL-config 2008-01-15 13:38:56.0 +0100 @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ sysconfdir=/etc sharedstatedir=/usr/com localstatedir=/var -libdir=/usr/lib +libdir=/usr/lib64 infodir=/usr/share/info mandir=/usr/share/man includedir=/usr/include This is a blocker, because it prevent you from installing 386 and the x86_64 packages in parallel. Actually the only difference between ppc and x86_64 (for example and expect for the pkgconfig path for libdir is: diff -uNr usr/include/ETL/etl_profile.h usr-x86_64/include/ETL/etl_profile.h --- usr/include/ETL/etl_profile.h 2008-01-15 13:49:01.0 +0100 +++ usr-x86_64/include/ETL/etl_profile.h 2008-01-15 13:49:01.0 +0100 @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ /* Define to 1 if your processor stores words with the most significant byte first (like Motorola and SPARC, unlike Intel and VAX). */ -#define WORDS_BIGENDIAN 1 +/* #undef WORDS_BIGENDIAN */ Bummer. This is yet another blocker. They are exporting a define which clashes with autoconf's autoheaders. This will render this package unusable with any autoconf based package using AC_BIG_ENDIAN (cf. info autoconf) and gcc43. Worse. Your remark had caused me to have a closer look into the headers. They are scattered with autoheader defines which all will trigger the same issue as outlined above. IMO, this package is not in a shape to be added. I recommend to withdraw it. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-15 20:07 EST --- Well Ralf raise a real problem... And i would give a chance to have an answear from upstream...But indeed, I won't approve anything that isn't gcc43 compliant. There is also the question to add some headers without any libs... I wonder if this make sense, specially if only one package use it. Does theses headers could be merged with another package ? -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library
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: ETL-devel - Extended Template Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||428568 nThis|| -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
