[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Nov 4 01:36:41 UTC 2005
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: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993
ed at eh3.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ed at eh3.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2005-11-03 20:36 EST -------
Hi Deji, I'm afraid this package needs a bit more work and here are the
specific comments:
needswork:
- I'm afraid I don't understand the with_jvm %define -- what
does it accomplish?
- rpmlint reports:
- a lot of ignorable "devel-file-in-non-devel-package"
warnings
- more ignorable "non-executable-script" and
"non-conffile-in-etc" warnings/errors related to conf
files that are in bash syntax and have a shebang
- are the following files really needed [what purpose
do they serve?] and perhaps can be deleted:
W: mpich2 unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/clog2_print.debug
E: mpich2 statically-linked-binary
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/clog2_print.debug
W: mpich2 unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/mpdroot.debug
E: mpich2 statically-linked-binary
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/mpdroot.debug
W: mpich2 unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/share/mpich2/examples/cpi.debug
E: mpich2 statically-linked-binary
/usr/lib/debug/usr/share/mpich2/examples/cpi.debug
- what is this error? Can we simply delete this file? :
E: mpich2 arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share
/usr/share/mpich2/examples/cpi
- The files in, for instance, /usr/include/* "pollute" the
standard name-space and should probably be placed in
something like /usr/include/mpich2/* or
/usr/lib/mpich2/include/* since they already conflict
with the "lam" package in Core. Please note that this
is a fairly critical bug since Extras packages should not
(AFAIK) conflict with any Core packages.
good:
+ source matches upstream
+ license looks OK and correctly included
+ specfile is clean and readable
So I think, at a min, a number of the rpmlint errors should be corrected
and a file layout should be chosen that allows mpich2 to be installed
concurrently (no conflicts) with the lam package already in Core.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/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.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list