[Bug 225622] Merge Review: boost

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Merge Review: boost


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225622





------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr  2007-04-10 07:30 EST -------
(In reply to comment #14)
> Thanks Patrice.
> 
> #11 looks good for me. 
> 
> As far as devel-static vs. static-devel vs. static, I don't see any other
> packages using static-devel. Do you? If not, why not? Is this something that
> should be asked on fedora-devel?

The guideline regarding static libs going in a separate package is
relatively new. I agree it is a good idea to have a separate package 
for the static libraries. I personally don't care whether it is named
-static, -static-devel, -devel-static and the guidelines leave this detail 
to the packager. I choosed -static-devel to silent rpmlint.

> #12 detail why you're doing the inlining and optimization changes. In addition,
> as long as you're doing this, you might as well do %optflags changes too.

I am not doing an inlining and optimization change, I am allowing the
user building boost to remove completely the <optimization> and 
<inlining> flags. Is there an other way?

Regarding the optflags, it would be bad to hardcode them in a patch, they
change depending on the platform, release, and so on and so forth. I
pass them through 
export GXX="%__cxx $RPM_OPT_FLAGS"
I couldn't find a way to pass them with <cxxflags> since, unless I'm wrong,
<cxxflags> only allows to pass them one by one.

And I also set  <optimization>no <inlining>no to avoid any <optimization>
and <inlining> flags to be set, such that they don't overwrite what is 
set in the optflags (and this is allowed by the patch in comment #12).


As a side note I had quite a hard time with bjam. It lacks a bit of
documentation and examples. I couldn't understand how to pass the python
linking flags that would allow to solve the underlinking issue, 
as explained in comment #5.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.