Spec URL: http://gemi.fedorapeople.org/racket.spec SRPM URL: http://gemi.fedorapeople.org/racket-5.0.2-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This is based on the plt-scheme package that I maintained. PLT Scheme has been renamed to racket, so a new package is needed. The SPEC file is almost the same. Any discussions that targeted the plt-scheme package should therefore be redirected to this review.
*** Bug 518895 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 451092 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 652083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'm part of the Racket development team, and I'd like to see this package revived. Is there anything I can do to help get it going?
I dabble in scheme and other programming languages. I would like to have this package available in Fedora. I cobbled together a working SPEC file for my personal use a few releases ago, but I don't have time to maintain an RPM during the academic year.
Hi Eli, (In reply to comment #4) > I'm part of the Racket development team, and I'd like to see this package > revived. Is there anything I can do to help get it going? There are some concerns about Racket's bundling of several system libraries -- could we get answers to the following questions so we can decide whether some of the bundling are necessary, and/or whether some of them should be replaced by using standalone upstream libraries, whether in their original state or as forked versions? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Standard_questions Thanks!
Which libraries are you talking about? The *sources* do have a copy of libffi libraries, since we want it to compile on systems that doesn't have it, but it's possible to build with the one installed on the system instead. (And IIRC, that's the default.) The only other thing I can think of are two libraries that are used for plots: there's libfit.so and libplplot.so, both from plplot. Those are "needed" because the guy who implemented our plot library took the sources straight from there, and modified it to work with Racket. This was obviously a bad idea, but the good news is that someone else picked it up recently and reimplemented the whole thing in plain Racket. This means that if there's any issue with allowing these two libraries, it's fine to just dump them, until we get rid of that completely.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 808350 ***