[Bug 226479] Merge Review: tcl

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Feb 15 19:44:41 UTC 2007


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: tcl


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226479





------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org  2007-02-15 14:44 EST -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> > E: tcl invalid-soname /usr/lib/libtcl8.4.so libtcl8.4.so
> It must stay for backward compatibility.

Right.  That's why I said the error could be ignored.

> > html
> Patch decline to generate useless html source. I think it's better than spend
> time with generating. I don't want split tcl into two packages, maybe in new
> version. It's small source for html.

The html: target in the Makefile isn't run by either 'make' or 'make install',
so won't get executed by the spec file anymore.  You have to explitly run
'make html' to trigger it.  Since 'make html' was removed from the spec file,
the -html patch isn't needed.

Splitting the -html package into a separate spec file isn't a 
requirement, but it is strongly encouraged because it will:
* simplify the tcl spec file
* make the tcl src rpm smaller
* prevent needless updates to the -html package whenever tcl is rebuilt
* shorten the build time for the tcl package since the -html subpackage
  won't be rebuilt
* allow the -html files to be properly marked as 'noarch'

> > Source does not match upstream.
> Could you give me http of your source? Because I check it and they are the same.

# curl -O http://puzzle.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/tcl/tcl8.4.13-src.tar.gz
# md5sum tcl8.4.13-src.tar.gz
c6b655ad5db095ee73227113220c0523  tcl8.4.13-src.tar.gz

...but this doesn't match the md5sum in the 'sources' file, nor does it
match the md5sum from the tcl source tarball that I get when running
'make srpm'.

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list