[Bug 599097] Review Request: libgexiv2 - Gexiv2 is a GObject-based wrapper around the Exiv2 library

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Jun 11 18:19:29 UTC 2010


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=599097

--- Comment #15 from Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur at gmail.com> 2010-06-11 14:19:28 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > PS : I dont understand how including the make portion(the new hack) works any
> > different from the earlier hack you had mentioned.    
> 
> It has to do with the way the shell handles variables. Each shell gets its own
> environment so that variables defined there are usually local and unknown
> outside. Adding "export" makes a variable accessible in the current shell S and
> also in all its sub-shells, but after returning to the parent of S they are
> removed. 
> So if I, for instance, define CFLAGS in a shell script "build.tmp" and use it
> in a spec file, CFLAGS is known inside the shell calling "build.tmp" but not in
> the parent (rpm) environment, i.e. all variable assignments are lost when
> returning to the parent (rpm) shell. Thus, the following "make" process doesn't
> know anything about the previously set CFLAGS variable. But when placing the
> make statement inside "build.tmp", the variable is still accessible. 
> I hope that's understandable. :)    


hey,

thanks, that does teach me a little more :)

(In reply to comment #14)
> A new version has been released upstream:
> http://yorba.org/download/gexiv2/0.0/unstable/
> 
> Would you like to update the package before the formal review?    

updated:

http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libgexiv2/libgexiv2.spec

http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libgexiv2/libgexiv2-0.0.91-1.fc13.src.rpm

mock results at 

http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libgexiv2/

regards,
Ankur

-- 
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.



More information about the package-review mailing list