Request for Review: libvisual-plugins

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:32 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 11:46 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote:
> > Works for me with Amarok on FC3
> > 
> > About the spec file :
> > * Files section : you could just delete the .la files in %install, with the
> > command "find %buildroot%_libdir -type f -name "*.la" -exec rm -f {} ';'"
> > and your files section would boil down to:
> > %{_libdir}/libvisual
> > %{_datadir}/libvisual
> > %{_datadir}/libvisual-plugins
> > (just an advice, you're the one maintaining in the end...)
> 
> done
> 
> > 
> > * BuildRequirements
> > You should add xorg-x11, because a makefile in the G-Force plugin dir uses
> > the command "mkdirhier" (build fails in mach without it, succeeds with it)
>
> done
Well, this actually is an underdeveloped Makefile.am.

Better patch the Makefile.am and Makefile.in to use $(mkinstalldirs)
instead of mkdirhier.

If there isn't any other dependency on xorg-x11 you should be able to
avoid xorg-x11 entirely.

>  - though I would think requiring xorg-x11-devel would have pulled
> that in. Bug in xorg spec file?

Depends on what you mean.

xorg-x11-devel doesn't have to depend on xorg-x11, because the
corresponding libs are part of xorg-x11-libs.

Having mkdirhier in xorg-x11 is arguable, but isn't actually wrong.

mkdirhier is X11's workaround to "mkdir -p" not being available on many
OSes. Historically it had been used outside of X11-development, which
might explain, why it is in xorg-x11. Nowadays, mkdirhier more or less
is an anachronism, only being used in Imakefiles.
Automake configurations should either use automake's own mkinstalldirs,
or (automake >= 1.9) should use $(mkdir_p).

Ralf

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: libvisual-plugins.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1372 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20050428/65236b49/attachment.bin>