[Bug 498604] Review Request: apron - Abstract numerical domain library

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jul 9 19:10:23 UTC 2009


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


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498604





--- Comment #2 from Alan Dunn <amdunn at gmail.com>  2009-07-09 15:10:22 EDT ---
Thanks for the comments.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Just a few comments:
> 
> No parallel make?  Sure would go faster on my lots-of-cores builder.  If it
> doesn't work you should at least add a comment indicating that.

I didn't look at this, so I'll see what I can do about allowing this.

> I'm having trouble understanding the reasoning here:
> > The first category of warnings are all about inclusion of libraries in the 
> > main package. Ostensibly, the whole purpose of the apron package is these 
> > libraries, so I was not sure of whether these belong in -devel.
> 
> So here's my question: What good are the static libraries without the headers
> in the -devel package?  Static libraries have no runtime use at all; they'll be
> embedded into executables at build time
> 
> The guidelines on static libraries should be pretty clear:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
> They should be in a separate -static package unless you really have no shared
> libraries at all, in which case they can be in -devel but you must still
> provide the -static symbol so that other packages can BuildRequires:
> apron-static.

> The prelink file confuses me.  Why is it in the main package?

You're right - this should go in ocaml-apron.

> Actually, why is anything at all in the main package?  

Well, I would think the few minor documentation files (since they are probably
not enough to comprise a whole doc subpackage) could go there.

I can certainly move all the static libraries to the devel subpackage, it just
seemed odd to put these in apron-devel as the purpose of the whole package is
already for development. I saw the guidelines, I just thought another opinion
might be in order nonetheless. I'll just move the files to devel as long as
it's okay to have essentially an empty main package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list