Bug 149225

Summary: Macaulay2 x86_64 build fix
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Rex Dieter <rdieter>
Component: Macaulay2Assignee: Rex Dieter <rdieter>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 3CC: bugs.michael, fedora, gauret
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-05-10 08:18:33 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
x86_64 specfile patch
none
x86_64 specfile patch (take 2) none

Description Rex Dieter 2005-02-21 15:21:36 UTC 
Here's a specfile fix to the build issue documented at
http://www.leemhuis.info/files/fedorarpms/misc/Macaulay2.x86_64.log

 %changelog
* Mon Feb 21 2005 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 0:0.9.2-14
- x86_64 issues (%%_libdir -> %%_prefix/lib )
- remove desktop_file macro usage
Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2005-02-21 15:21:36 UTC 
Created attachment 111258 [details]
x86_64 specfile patch
Comment 2 Rex Dieter 2005-02-21 15:36:10 UTC 
Created attachment 111259 [details]
x86_64 specfile patch (take 2)

patch that actually works this time (previous had an extraneous %endif)
Comment 3 Thorsten Leemhuis 2005-03-24 20:05:59 UTC 
Rex, there is a typo in you patch in the files section (search for "m2hoome")

Im also unsure if I like this solution. Especially if we can tolerate this file
in /usr/lib/:

/usr/lib/Macaulay2-0.9.2/libexec/Macaulay2: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, AMD
x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.0, dynamically linked (uses shared
libs), stripped

Michael, what do you think?
Comment 4 Michael Schwendt 2005-03-25 03:22:24 UTC 
If Macaulay2 builds for x86_64 and we don't ship an i386 Macaulay2 in the x86_64
Extras repo, there's no need to relocate it further. This package does not
provide any 64-bit or 32-bit libraries shared with other 64-bit or 32-bit
applications. Since this is an application package and not a library provider,
it cannot coexist (as in "parallel installable") with an i386 Macaulay2 anyway.
Other x86_64 packages put executables into their home directories below
/usr/lib/foo, too, btw. E.g. xcdroast.

As a side-note, if one really wanted to, it shouldn't be a problem to move
/usr/lib/Macaulay2-0.9.2/libexec to /usr/lib64/Macaulay2-0.9.2/libexec and
adjust /usr/bin/M2 accordingly. Is there any other place where the libexec
directory is hardcoded?
Comment 5 Thorsten Leemhuis 2005-03-25 13:50:37 UTC 
(In reply to comment #4)
> If Macaulay2 builds for x86_64 and we don't ship an i386 Macaulay2 in the x86_64
> Extras repo, there's no need to relocate it further.

Thanks for the clarification -- I was unsure on that. 

Rex, shall I commit the patch to cvs and request a build? Afaik your paperwork
for cvs is still in the works?
Comment 6 Rex Dieter 2005-03-25 13:54:02 UTC 
Yes, yes, respectively (don't know what the cvs holdup is... the last contact I
had was March 5th...)
Comment 7 Thorsten Leemhuis 2005-03-25 15:20:34 UTC 
Commited. Will request build tomorrow.
Comment 8 Thorsten Leemhuis 2005-05-10 07:56:17 UTC 
Build was done and succeed yesterday after problems with the buildsystem before.
Please close (I can't)