[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740
--- Comment #10 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-02 05:12:13
EDT ---
f2c-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
f2c-libs.x86_64: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22
f2c-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22
e...@glibc_2.2.5
f2c-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
f2c-libs.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22
f2c-libs.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 3 warnings.
- The post and postun
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
should be
%post libs -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun libs -p /sbin/ldconfig
- I think the no-ldconfig-symlink warning can be fixed by creating
ln -sf libf2c.so.0.22 %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libf2c.so.0
Try if this works.
--
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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #12 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-02 05:17:48 EDT --- Of course, not having documentation in some subpackage is OK, if there is nothing to be put 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #11 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-02 05:17:19 EDT --- Oh, and move the license files (and any other general files) to the -libs package, since the -libs package is going to be always present. The documentation specific to f2c stays in the main package, and the documentation to the headers and development libraries go to -devel. -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #13 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-12-02 11:19:30 EDT --- I don't see any documentation files specific to the -libs package. Currently f2c does not require f2c-libs, and f2c-libs does not require f2c. Should I add a requires to force one or the other, so that the license files will always get installed? A similar question for mpqc. The only interpackage dependencies are mpqc-devel requires mpqc-libs requires mpqc-data. The license files are installed in mpqc, so if only mpqc-libs is installed, the user has no license files. What is the general approach to such packages with multiple mostly independent subpackages. It seems there are only three choices. Force an artifical dependency on the subpackage that contains the license files, install multiple copies of the license files in each independent subpackage, or allow some subpackages to install with no license files. -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #14 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-02 12:30:08 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) Currently f2c does not require f2c-libs, and f2c-libs does not require f2c. Should I add a requires to force one or the other, so that the license files will always get installed? A similar question for mpqc. The only interpackage dependencies are mpqc-devel requires mpqc-libs requires mpqc-data. The license files are installed in mpqc, so if only mpqc-libs is installed, the user has no license files. What is the general approach to such packages with multiple mostly independent subpackages. It seems there are only three choices. Force an artifical dependency on the subpackage that contains the license files, install multiple copies of the license files in each independent subpackage, or allow some subpackages to install with no license files. When the packages are configured to use shared libraries, the lib dependencies will always be there. For instance $ rpm -qp --requires mpqc-2.3.1-12.fc12.x86_64.rpm /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/wish libSCbasis.so.7()(64bit) libSCclass.so.7()(64bit) libSCcontainer.so.7()(64bit) libSCdft.so.7()(64bit) and so on. The lib dependencies pull in the -libs package, along with its licenses. Independent packages must contain all (relevant) documentation in every package, but we avoid duplication of files in interdependent packages. -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #15 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-12-02 13:02:30 EDT --- Ok for mpqc, but not f2c. rpm -q --requires f2c libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 it seems that f2c does not actually link against the libf2c shared libraries. Looking at the source, f2c itself does not use any of the code in libf2c. I think the c code *generated* by f2c needs the libf2c libraries. -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740
--- Comment #16 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-02 13:12:11
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #15)
Ok for mpqc, but not f2c.
it seems that f2c does not actually link against the libf2c shared libraries.
Looking at the source, f2c itself does not use any of the code in libf2c. I
think the c code *generated* by f2c needs the libf2c libraries.
Well.. That's odd. OK, maybe libf2c contains some intrinsic Fortran functions,
that are then called in the C code produced by f2c.
Anyway, this means you will have to put in explicit dependencies. Better yet to
version them fully. i.e. the main package has to
Requires: %{name}-libs = %{version}-%{release}
and the devel package just
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
which pulls in f2c, which pulls in f2c-libs.
--
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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed: What|Removed |Added CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no --- Comment #7 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2009-12-01 03:30:34 EDT --- I don't see the need to continue the strange release tag, just change 3.0.3 to 4. -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-12-01 04:04:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) I don't see the need to continue the strange release tag, just change 3.0.3 to 4. Yes, I agree. You could even reset it to 1, since the package hasn't been in Fedora for ages. ** By the way, you're using Source, but Patch0. Please be consistent, and use Source0 or drop the 0 from the patch. ** Looking at changes on netlib, the latest entry is Sat Apr 11 18:06:00 MDT 2009 src/sysdep.c src/sysdeptest.c: tweak for MacOSX (include unistd.h). so the version field should be updated to correspond to it (and the source be updated if you are using the version from the old spec file). -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #9 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-12-01 21:59:09 EDT --- Source updated from netlib, 0 dropped from patch, patch redone to correspond to the latest source, release tag reset to 1, alpha arch dropped. This latest f2c seems to be compatible with the rest of ghemical. http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c.spec http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c-20090411-1.fc12.src.rpm scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1842593 -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #1 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-11-30 12:35:42 EDT --- It helps if I use the proper URLs. Spec URL: http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c.spec SRPM URL: http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c-20031026-3.0.2.fc12.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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||542760 -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||542765 -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||542767 -- 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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-11-30 15:26:45
EDT ---
- Move the static library to a -static subpackage (or don't ship it at all -
why bother with static libraries?).
- You are mixing styles, i.e. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT vs. %{buildroot}, $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
vs. %{optflags}.
- I think you can safely drop the alpha stuff (%ifarch axp and %patch0).
Otherwise, add a comment to the spec about the patch.
- If you drop the patch, replace
make RPM_OPT_FLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS MFLAG=$MFLAG
with
make CFLAGS=%{optflags}
- Please use
%{_bindir}/f2c
%{_includedir}/f2c.h
instead of using wildcards when referring to single files. Don't mix %{name}
and f2c interchangeably in the spec.
- Preserve time stamps in %install with install -p.
- Don't use install -s which strips the binary.
- You don't need to create the installation directories with
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_libdir}
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_includedir}
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1
if you just use install -D.
= e.g.
%install
rm -rf %{buildroot}
install -D -p -m 644 libf2c/libf2c.a %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libf2c.a
install -D -p -m 644 f2c.h %{buildroot}%{_includedir}/f2c.h
install -D -p -m 755 src/f2c %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/f2c
install -D -p -m 644 src/f2c.1t %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/f2c.1
install -D -p -m 755 libf2c/libf2c.so.0.22
%{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libf2c.so.0.22
ln -sf libf2c.so.0.22 %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libf2c.so
- I guess you can tidy the changelog by removing the oldest entries that are
not versioned.
- rpmlint is not clean:
f2c.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program
and static libraries.
f2c.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary f2c
f2c.src:12: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes f2c-libs
f2c.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion
program and static libraries.
f2c.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary f2c
f2c.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided f2c-libs
f2c.x86_64: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22
f2c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22 e...@glibc_2.2.5
f2c.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libf2c.so
f2c.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/f2c.h
f2c.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libf2c.a
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 10 warnings.
--
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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-11-30 15:28:54 EDT --- - You don't need to obsolete f2c-libs anymore. Drop it. - You don't need to care about the shared-lib-calls-exit warning. Once you have fixed the issues raised above, I will do the full 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #4 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-11-30 18:56:21 EDT --- Those should all be fixed in: http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c.spec http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c-20031026-3.0.3.fc12.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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740
--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-11-30 19:03:22
EDT ---
- Instead of
%define libname f2c-libs
%package -n %{libname}
%files -n %{libname}
just use
%package libs
%files libs
and so on.
- You don't need
Provides: %{name}-devel = %{version}-%{release}
since the -devel package will be already %{name}-%{devel}.
- Version the requires fully in the -devel package, i.e.
Requires: %{libname} = %{version}-%{release}
--
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
[Bug 542740] Review Request: f2c - The f2c Fortran to C/C++ conversion program and static libraries
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=542740 --- Comment #6 from Carl Byington c...@five-ten-sg.com 2009-11-30 20:47:06 EDT --- Those should all be fixed in: http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c.spec http://www.five-ten-sg.com/f2c-20031026-3.0.3.fc12.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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
