Request for review: libpqxx

[Andreas Bierfert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Schwendt wrote:
 > $ pqxx-config --libs
> -L/usr/lib -lpqxx -L/usr/lib -R/usr/lib -lpq
> 
> The  -R/usr/lib  option here is a source of future trouble, as it
> sets an RPATH.

Is that ok now:

$ pqxx-config --libs
- -L/usr/lib -lpqxx -L/usr/lib -lpq

All other stuff mentioned by Tom  is fixed as well :)

http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/libpqxx-2.5.4-3.src.rpm
http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/libpqxx.spec

So is this ok for import/approval?


> As a rule of thumb: whenever a -devel package contains a foo-config
> executable or a pkg-config file, these are worth examining for dependencies
> on other -devel packages. If no foo-config program or pkg-config file
> is included, it may need more effort to examine included C/C++ headers
> for dependencies.

Is this a policy? I don't know... I reather would think if somebody needs to use
the devel package that somebody would need to install the libs to and not do it
automatically via Requires. That is why they where missing in the first place in
my spec... I don't care one way or the other myself both is perfectly ok... it's
just a question of consistancy between all packages... :)

- - Andreas

- --
Andreas Bierfert               | http://awbsworld.de      | GPG: C58CF1CB
andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de     | signed/encrypted
phone: +49 2402 102373         | cell: +49 172 9789968    | mail preferred
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCxR4AQEQyPsWM8csRAiZKAKCssWzuJ8ZK8CYI2ywjaXcbhEQ71wCgtiez
MtS7GeybZ1guApI2gw12LEw=
=jMe2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----