Spec URL: cvs://:cvs.devel.redhat.com/cvs/dist/rpms/compat-gcc-34/devel/compat-gcc-34.spec SRPM URL: make srpm in cvs.devel checkout Description: This package is analoguous to compat-gcc-32 in FC5 and earlier. The proposed compat compiler/libraries set for FC6/RHEL5 is: compat-gcc-34 (subpackages compat-gcc-34, compat-gcc-34-{c++,g77,libf2c}) is GCC 3.4.6-RH compiler (no compat-libstdc++-34, as GCC 4.1.1-RH libstdc++ is backwards compatible with 3.4.6-RH). compat-gcc-32 will only build compat-libstdc++-32 subpackage and compat-libstdc++-296 will still exist too, just with all pre-2.96-RH libraries nuked.
I personally think that this should live in extras not core. unless something in core needs the older compiler to build.
No, this needs to be in the core.
NEEDSWORK: - Defining gcc_version and then using it in all places you could use Version: is silly, and unnecessarily complicated. - Ditto gcc_release - Don't start summary with "The" - Buildroot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) - Lots of Obsoletes w/out provides - PreReq instead of Requires(pre) or Requires(post) or just Requires.
New spec file checked into CVS, except for the - Lots of Obsoletes w/out provides point. The Obsoletes are in primarily to avoid keeping 10 years old compat gcc's around on upgrades and because some of the old compat packages conflict with this one.
Ok, looks good now, all the rpmlint warnings can be ignored (gcc is speshul). Bill, tech ack?
Sure.
I've added it to dist-fc6, jakub does this need to be in comps somewhere? (which I would assume given the "it must be in core" attitude)
Yes, Legacy software development. But that category will need some further editing (e.g. most of the compat-gcc-32-* subpackages are going away, compat-gcc doesn't exist for ages, etc.).
Ok, patches welcome (:
I still dont get why this needs to be in core. it could live perfectly happy in extras. extras has a comps is installable at initial install time. is available in pirut. AFAICT the only reason any of the compat-gcc packages should be in core is if a package in core relies on it to build. otherwise they all should be moved to extras. living in Extras does not preclude it from being in RHEL
I'd second that - why does this need to be in core ? What package in core requires it to build ?
(In reply to comment #11) > I'd second that - why does this need to be in core ? What package in core > requires it to build ? I'll second that second :). I also see no reason why this needs to be in core.
This is closed for now. They've gone into core, but a new bug could be opened to ask for their move to Extras.
New bug #204124