[Bug 19] Review request: blcr - Berkeley Lab Checkpoint/Restart for Linux
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19
--- Comment #14 from Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com> 2008-12-18 17:40:12 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
> * Try to avoid mixed ${ } %{_ } notation
Do you mean:
chrpath -d ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/%{_bindir}/cr_checkpoint
Suggested alternative?
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT or possibly just %{buildroot} . Actually, on a second thought,
this particular one is no big deal, you can leave it as is. Just try to stay
"as consistent as possible" with the macros in the future.
> * Please remove the static library bits from the SPEC file.
I assume you mean to unconditionally build static libs for devel.
Done.
No, I meant: no static libraries at all.
Well if there's a definite need for static libraries. They should be built and
put in a -static subpackage.
> * The file tests/CountingApp.class is binary and should be
removed during %prep
It isn't installed, do we care?
Yes, we do. It is a common practice to remove the precompiled binaries in %prep
>
> * The file README.devel is not and should be packaged.
Why?
It contains information for people who might want to develop this software.
> * Disttag is missing.
What is this?
Disttag is: %{?dist}
You usually add it to the end of Release tag.
For example:
Version: 2.5
Release: 3{?dist}
>
> * The Fedora-specific compilation flag -fstack-protector is not passed to the
> compiler. For a list of flags that should be passed to the compiler, please do
> a
> rpm --eval %optflags
>
Search for -fno-stack-protector in the build log. During the compilation of
certain files, that one is passed instead of -fstack-protector .
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.