[Fedora-packaging] Mono Packaging Issues

Paul paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk
Tue Jun 13 23:27:58 UTC 2006


> > The problem is that for libraries, if something needs to link to it,
> > the .pc file isn't usually found if you've installed to the default 64
> > bit directory.
> > 
> The .pc file isn't found by what?  pkg-config?  A configure script?
> Some other program in the build process?  We have to know what's making
> the mistakes in order to fix it.

I'm not actually sure, though I would imagine it's pkg-config. When I
run a spec file, it executes the configure script which itself calls
pkg-config for the libs.

> > > * Do all mono packages belong under %{_libdir}/mono or should there be
> > > more flexibility?  How much? (Allow %{_libdir}/[PKGNAME]?  Allow
> > > %{_datadir}/PKGNAME because upstream should know if their package is
> > > truly arch independent?)
> > 
> > should know and do know are not the same. For quite a few packages (such
> > as gtk-sharp), they are already in %{_libdir}/[PKGNAME]
> > 
> Do you mean gtk-sharp2?

Yes. Sorry. It's been a damned long day.

> Do you mean it installs a helper app into /usr/lib/[PKGNAME]?

It installs gapi2xml.pl, gapi_codegen.exe, gapi_fixup.exe,
gapi-parser.exe, gapi_pp.pl and gconfsharp-schemagen.exe

> I'm being very careful to differentiate between /usr/lib and %{_libdir}
> because /usr/lib has multiple roles on x86_64 in Fedora Core. (Place for
> 32bit libraries.  Repository for arch independent python and perl
> libraries.)

Thanks - I knew there was something special about /usr/lib on 64 bit,
but never actually what it was!

> > >   - If we allow more flexibility (for instance, allowing nant to install
> > > to %{_datadir}) how do we check that the .dlls and .exes are truly
> > > platform independent?
> > No idea - I would imagine in the same way as you would check something
> > written in Java. 
> > 
> Java jars are bytecode.  Native code is compiled into a .so.  From
> reading the links I posted earlier, it appears that .dlls and .exes can
> contain both arch independent and platform specific code.  So filename
> extension is not an indicator.  I haven't found any indication that
> file(1) knows the difference either.

I'm actually there is a safe way to do it other than having a 64 bit box
with everything 64 bit on it and see if the 32 bit binary works. Not a
very good idea though - too many false positives.

I've looked at monodis, but that won't do the job and can't find
anything on google either.


ich liebe Ashleigh, eins zwei drei 
ich liebe Ashleigh, auf meinem Knee zu hüpfen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060614/c88f171b/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list