[Bug 226671] Merge Review: zlib

[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: zlib


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226671





------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr  2007-02-19 18:22 EST -------
(In reply to comment #5)

> > * Is Prefix: %{_prefix} needed?
> I prefer to leave prefix flag set there.

Why? It is allready set to that exact value?

> > and in %install there could be a comment saying
> > # the first make triggers compilation of the object files, linking of the
> > # shared library and installs the library
> > # The second make triggers the linking of the static library and 
> > # its installation
> this comment is not necessary 

I disagree. Doing the build in %install is messy and deserves a comment.
You should try to do your best such that anybody looking at your spec
can understand immediately what you are doing. Doing comments for non
standard build procedures is important.

> These documents are not part of upstream tarball

Why is it an issue? A description of the API is missing, th
 
> > * It seems to me that there should be a make clean between the 2
> > make -f invocations, to trigger recompilation with the flags without -fPIC
> > * I'll attach a patch to simplify the build and install, and use more
> > macros.
> fixed

Not completely. I still see some issues with the spec file:

* executables are compiled as part of %install and not %build
* man pages are not installed in %{_mandir}, libs are not
  in %{_libdir}, headers are not in %{_includedir}
* files compiled with shared libs flags (-fPIC) are used for 
  static libraries.


-- 
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.