[Fedora-packaging] Mono Packaging Issues

[Paul]

Hi,

>  
> > The problem is that for libraries, if something needs to link to it,
> > the .pc file isn't usually found if you've installed to the default 64
> > bit directory.
> > 
> The .pc file isn't found by what?  pkg-config?  A configure script?
> Some other program in the build process?  We have to know what's making
> the mistakes in order to fix it.

I'm not actually sure, though I would imagine it's pkg-config. When I
run a spec file, it executes the configure script which itself calls
pkg-config for the libs.

> > > * Do all mono packages belong under %{_libdir}/mono or should there be
> > > more flexibility?  How much? (Allow %{_libdir}/[PKGNAME]?  Allow
> > > %{_datadir}/PKGNAME because upstream should know if their package is
> > > truly arch independent?)
> > 
> > should know and do know are not the same. For quite a few packages (such
> > as gtk-sharp), they are already in %{_libdir}/[PKGNAME]
> > 
> Do you mean gtk-sharp2?

Yes. Sorry. It's been a damned long day.

> Do you mean it installs a helper app into /usr/lib/[PKGNAME]?

It installs gapi2xml.pl, gapi_codegen.exe, gapi_fixup.exe,
gapi-parser.exe, gapi_pp.pl and gconfsharp-schemagen.exe

> I'm being very careful to differentiate between /usr/lib and %{_libdir}
> because /usr/lib has multiple roles on x86_64 in Fedora Core. (Place for
> 32bit libraries.  Repository for arch independent python and perl
> libraries.)

Thanks - I knew there was something special about /usr/lib on 64 bit,
but never actually what it was!

> > >   - If we allow more flexibility (for instance, allowing nant to install
> > > to %{_datadir}) how do we check that the .dlls and .exes are truly
> > > platform independent?
> 
> > No idea - I would imagine in the same way as you would check something
> > written in Java. 
> > 
> Java jars are bytecode.  Native code is compiled into a .so.  From
> reading the links I posted earlier, it appears that .dlls and .exes can
> contain both arch independent and platform specific code.  So filename
> extension is not an indicator.  I haven't found any indication that
> file(1) knows the difference either.

I'm actually there is a safe way to do it other than having a 64 bit box
with everything 64 bit on it and see if the 32 bit binary works. Not a
very good idea though - too many false positives.

I've looked at monodis, but that won't do the job and can't find
anything on google either.

TTFN

Paul
-- 
ich liebe Ashleigh, eins zwei drei 
ich liebe Ashleigh, auf meinem Knee zu hüpfen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20060614/c88f171b/attachment.bin