[Bug 1069257] Review Request: fparser - Function parser library for C++

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069257



--- Comment #17 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> ---
An update:

 * Debian includes an older 4.3 version of the library.
https://packages.debian.org/squeeze-backports/libfparser-4.3

 * They have chosen to patch it as well, but differently. They add an Autotools
based configure script and include a pkgconfig file in their -dev package.

 * Their shared lib is named libfparser-4.3.so (and libfparser.so in the devel
package for build-time linking).

Depending on which other projects rely on building with the pkgconfig file (or,
in the future, your CMake files), it may become necessary to join forces and
agree on a compatible build framework (even if upstream does not want to
include those files [yet], maybe not even in a contrib folder).

  $ rpm -qp --provides fparser-4.5.1-3.fc20.x86_64.rpm |grep ^l
  libfparser.so.4.5()(64bit)

Your libfparser.so.4.5 SONAME currently differs from Debian's library naming
scheme. That's a binary incompatibility to think about as well.

Inventing library sonames at the distribution level (without support from
upstream) is non-trivial almost always. Skimming over the fparser
changelog/news it's hard for me to predict how compatible the individual minor
releases have been and will be. Especially the burden of checking releases for
ABI compatibility (and updating the SONAME version appropriately) will be on
your shoulders (i.e. the packager's shoulders).
Debian's libfoo-$major.$minor.so naming is a slightly better compromise,
because it is explicit about $major.$minor being the product release version
and not being a varying library interface version.

Thoughts?


> %{_libdir}/cmake/*

When not adding "Requires: cmake" the directory needs to be included in the
package:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function


I think there's nothing else in the spec/packaging that needs a fix during
review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]