[Bug 810059] Review request: opencl-utils - Useful OpenCL tools and utilities
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Apr 21 09:46:02 UTC 2012
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=810059
Alec Leamas <leamas.alec at gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |leamas.alec at gmail.com
Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #18 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec at gmail.com> 2012-04-21 05:45:55 EDT ---
OK, starting review phase. Initial remarks, all based on "common sense" rather
than specific rules in the guidelines:
- The package structure is not clear and needlessly complicated. It also
doesn't reflect the upstream structure. Please merge this to a simple structure
with a opencl-utils base package + -devel and -debuginfo packages like in
comment #13.
- The include files are installed in %{_libdir}/opencl-utils/include. This is
not really suitable. Please install the files into %{_libdir}/opencl-utils
instead.
- There is no information on how to use the package i. e., compilation and link
flags. Please either add a pkg-config file according to comment #14 or a
README.fedora which states the flags needed to compile and link using the
package.
- The example files does not build, please update to fix. Note that if you go
for the pkg-config path, the text in comment #14 is wrong. It should be
'cc $(pkg-config --cflags --libs opencl-utils) example1.c'
and 'g++ $(pkg-config --cflags --libs opencl-utils) example2.cpp'
I understand that from your perspective this is just a dependency which works
as-is. However, the whole point with unbundling libraries is that they should
be usable also to others. That's why I stress these issues.
--
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