[Bug 492164] Review Request: healpix - Hierarchical Equal Area isoLatitude Pixelization of a sphere

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492164





--- Comment #8 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak at v3.sk>  2009-04-04 02:36:24 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> rpmlint output:
> chealpix.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libchealpix.so
> chealpix.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libchealpix.so
> exit at GLIBC_2.2.5
> chealpix-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> healpix-fortran.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libgif.so
> healpix-fortran.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libhealpix.so
> healpix-fortran-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

I believe these are OK, right? I mean, we don't want to craft a SONAME, do we?
We can still ask upstream though.

> - Did you send the shared library patch upstream? IIRC some package sponsors
> have frowned on Fedora specific patches to build shared libraries.

Heh, well, no, I had a little motivation fixing utterly broken makefiles. I may
send it upstream, but I'm quite sure it breaks something about the static
library compilation, and in fact does it impossible to compile statically w/o
modifying the code. I'm not sure they would accept this.

> - Even though there is only one C header, it might be logical to put it into
> the same place as the Fortran module files.

Well, yes, I had exactly the same thought. You see, I decided not to change
location when there was not Fortran module. I believe it might be a bad
decision as well. We would need to change each program that includes it to
-I%{_includedir}/healpix it, the very same thing we do with cfitsio. I believe
leaving it in its upstream-decided traditional location has its upsides as
well.

I have no problem moving it if you insist on it though.

> - Maybe Fortran package should be named just 'healpix'.

You decide. I see F90 library is called "libhealpix" in contrast to C's
"libchealpix", which makes me tend to agree. Depends on where would a typical
user of that library expect it to find. Honestly, I'm not exactly that kind of
person (and am, in fact, secretly expecting you to comaintain the package and
take care of the Fortran bindings ;)

Shortly put -- you seem to know the library much better than me, so I'd prefer
stuff like naming packages and shifting files around up to you.

> MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. NEEDSFIX
> - chealpix and healpix-fortran need to call ldconfig in %post phase.

Good catch, will fix.

> MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
> package using a fully versioned dependency. NEEDSFIX
> - fortran-devel must require fortran since the libraries are in fortran.

Hah, this was your code, no? ;)
Anyways, will fix.

New package (probably just fixing the MUST items) following shortly.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.