Spec Name or Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/bigloo.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/4/i386/SRPMS.gemi/bigloo-2.6f-2.src.rpm Description: Bigloo is a compiler and interpreter for an extended version of the Scheme programming language. Bigloo allows a full connection between Scheme and C programs. It delivers fast and small executables.
- When building in mock I get this after ./configure : ERROR: Illegal option "--arch=i386" It looks like the arch must be > i586 - You should also use smp_mflags, or put a comment explaining that this package does not build with it (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake)
SRPM: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/4/i386/SRPMS.gemi/bigloo-2.6f-3.src.rpm - removed the arch configuration - smp_mflags builds the break, included a comment about this
* RPM name is OK * Source bigloo2.6f.tar.gz is the same as upstream * This is the latest version * Builds fine in mock * rpmlints look OK * File lists look OK * Tested on some included examples, seems to work.
* Bugzilla component is missing. * Broken package dependencies on ppc: $ rpm -qpR bigloo-libs-2.6f-1.fc4.ppc.rpm | grep build /builddir/build/BUILD/bigloo2.6f/lib/2.6f/libbigloo_s-2.6f.so Same for bigloo-2.6f-1.fc4.ppc.rpm
(In reply to comment #4) > * Bugzilla component is missing. Ok, updated owners.list > * Broken package dependencies on ppc: > > $ rpm -qpR bigloo-libs-2.6f-1.fc4.ppc.rpm | grep build > /builddir/build/BUILD/bigloo2.6f/lib/2.6f/libbigloo_s-2.6f.so > > Same for bigloo-2.6f-1.fc4.ppc.rpm Do you know what's wrong there, bigloo-libs-2.6f-3 doesn't have this problem.
bigloo-libs-2.6f-3 is not in CVS and not in the repository either. bigloo-libs-2.6f-1.fc4 is. devel ppc is affected, too. In the ppc build log it might be possible to see what it does with your LD_LIBRARY_PATH which is modified to include a build directory. $ grep builddir * Binary file libbigloobdl_s-2.6f.so matches Binary file libbigloobdl_u-2.6f.so matches Binary file libbigloofth_s-2.6f.so matches Binary file libbigloofth_u-2.6f.so matches $ readelf -d libbigloobdl_s-2.6f.so | grep build 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [/builddir/build/BUILD/bigloo2.6f/lib/2.6f/libbigloo_s-2.6f.so]
(In reply to comment #6) > bigloo-libs-2.6f-3 is not in CVS and not in the repository either. My mistake. I installed anew from extras. But still the i386 bigloo-2.6f-1.fc4 doesn't have this problem. I would like to know what it is that is different in the ppc build. Building and linking should be identical, shouldn't it? > bigloo-libs-2.6f-1.fc4 is. devel ppc is affected, too. In the ppc > build log it might be possible to see what it does with your > LD_LIBRARY_PATH which is modified to include a build directory. > > $ grep builddir * > Binary file libbigloobdl_s-2.6f.so matches > Binary file libbigloobdl_u-2.6f.so matches > Binary file libbigloofth_s-2.6f.so matches > Binary file libbigloofth_u-2.6f.so matches > > $ readelf -d libbigloobdl_s-2.6f.so | grep build > 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: > [/builddir/build/BUILD/bigloo2.6f/lib/2.6f/libbigloo_s-2.6f.so] There are always some problems with archs other than i386, mostly ppc, sometimes x86_64. I have no means to test on these, maybe there should be some experts in the fedora project, that can help these problem, or at least a testing build system, where one can try out some things.
Sorry, cannot assist with testing/analysis on ppc. Above is based on output created by repoclosure, which I've started to play with a bit.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: bigloo New Branches: EL-5 EL-6 Owners: salimma
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).