[Bug 486757] Review Request: divine-mc - Multi-core model checking system for proving specifications

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Mar 3 03:13:46 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=486757





--- Comment #3 from David A. Wheeler <dwheeler at dwheeler.com>  2009-03-02 22:13:46 EDT ---
Thanks.  I've fixed it, including the ppc64 issue.  It now packages for all
architectures on both dist-f10 and dist-f11 (using koji build --scratch).

The Rawhide problem was primarily because the new gcc 4.4 is much stricter
about C++ headers.  Basically, you HAVE to #include <cstdio> if you use stuff
that's defined there (like EOF).  In previous gcc's, many other #includes also
quietly brought in these definitions.  gcc's new behavior is correct, but I
think we'll see LOTS of C++ patches for this Fedora release (!).  There's also
a change in the flex++ API that I had to resolve.  This was unfun to work
around, but I think I've got it.  I also added throw() definitions for 2
mallocs as an optimization/cleanup, courtesy of some Ubuntu feedback.

In the process, I think also managed to solve the ppc64 debuginfo problem.  It
turns out that if you invoke gcc with "-gstabs+", the debuginfo process will
fail.  This happens on x86_64 on rawhide, too.  It's a known Fedora bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453506

Here's the koji scratch build for dist-f11:
 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215612
Koji scratch build for dist-f10:
 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1215692

They're rpmlint-clean; I did rpmlint on the .spec, the SRPM, and
divine-mc-1.3-3.fc11.x86_64.rpm.

Here's the updated spec and SRPM:
Spec URL: http://www.dwheeler.com/divine-mc.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.dwheeler.com/divine-mc-1.3-3.fc10.src.rpm

-- 
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