Bug 1575257
Summary: | Review Request: llbuild - A low-level build system, used by Xcode 9 and the Swift Package Manager | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Sascha Peilicke <sascha> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | ngompa13, package-review, sascha, zbyszek, zebob.m |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2020-07-21 09:54:33 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 177841 |
Description
Sascha Peilicke
2018-05-05 13:07:58 UTC
- Not needed: Group: Development - Apache-2.0 is not a valid license shorthand, use "ASL 2.0". See full list: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses - Use %global instead of %define: %global rel swift-%{version}-RELEASE It should generally be located in the header for clarity - Also use a Release instead of a Development snapshots, latest is: https://github.com/apple/swift-llbuild/releases/tag/swift-4.1.1-RELEASE - Split your BR one per line BuildRequires: clang cmake ncurses-devel sqlite-devel - Spit your description to stay below 80 characters per line: %description llbuild is a set of libraries for building build systems. Unlike most build system projects which focus on the syntax for describing the build, llbuild is designed around a reusable, flexible, and scalable general purpose build engine capable of solving many "build system"-like problems. The project also includes additional libraries on top of that engine which provide support for constructing bespoke build systems (like swift build) or for building from Ninja manifests. - The licence file must be installed with %license not %doc: %doc CONTRIBUTING.md README.md %license LICENSE.txt - You're installing a library in %{_libdir}, you must run %ldconfig_scriptlets after %install - Add your own changelog entry: %changelog * Sat May 05 2018 Sascha Peilicke <sascha> - 4.1.1-1 - Initial RPM release - pass build flags to cmake, they need to be tweaked because of clang %global fixed_set_build_flags echo '%set_build_flags' | sed 's/-mcet -fcf-protection//' %fixed_set_build_flags CC=$(which clang) CXX=$(which clang++) %__cmake .. \ -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING="-DNDEBUG" \ -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING="-DNDEBUG" \ -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING="-DNDEBUG" \ -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE:BOOL=ON \ -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=%{_prefix} \ -DINCLUDE_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=%{_includedir} \ -DLIB_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=%{_libdir} \ -DSYSCONF_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=%{_sysconfdir} \ -DSHARE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=%{_datadir} \ %if "%{?_lib}" == "lib64" %{?_cmake_lib_suffix64} \ %endif -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL=ON Instead of reimplementing the %cmake macro just to add CC and CXX vars, you can just do: export CC=clang export CXX=clang++ %cmake .. (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #2) > Instead of reimplementing the %cmake macro just to add CC and CXX vars, you > can just do: > > export CC=clang > export CXX=clang++ > %cmake .. The issue there is that the %cmake macro defines -mcet and -fcf-protection flags, whicha re incompatible with clang. @Sascha Peilick Latest clang may support -mcet and -fcf-protection flags, so it may not be needed to redefine %cmake. Are you still interested in packaging this? Maybe, but let's not bikeshed. I'd much prefer to get the git repository up and running. I can then try the macro again. I didn't expect contributing takes so much patience. Sascha, I see a few review requests from you, with unaddressed review comments (e.g. comment #1 above, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575255#c5). Are you still planning to finish those? This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience. |