Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 21:23 -0600 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: > On 19 December 2007 at 01:29, Manuel Prinz wrote: > | I'm not sure about that. I didn't see that on a quick read of chapters 8 > | and 10, though policy states in 10.2: > | > Packages that use libtool to create shared libraries should > | > include the .la files in the -dev package, unless the package > | > relies on libtool's libltdl library, in which case the .la > | > files must go in the run-time library package. > > That's not what I had I mind. I think there was a more general recommendation > of sticking .so files, headers files, static libraries, ... into the -dev > package. Anyway, I may well be wrong.
You're right, chapter 8 is about that. It explains how the packaging has to be done and that static libraries have to go into the -dev package. But I can't find that one has to provide static libraries. > Some comments and questions: [...] > > 2) I do not understand some of the file splits. Eg why > /usr/lib/libmca_common_sm.so.0 > Why does that need to be in /usr/lib/ and not hidden below like the other > mca* ones ? Ldd on the Rmpi library doesn't show it, maybe other MPI > usage does. Do you know a case where it is needed? The files was placed in /usr/lib before and not in /usr/lib/openmpi where the private libs where, so I expected it to be essential. I installed everything in the place where upstream installs them. (Leaving the symlinking aside.) > 3) Links like > > libopen-rte.so.0 -> openmpi/lib/libopen-rte.so.0 > libopen-rte.so -> openmpi/lib/libopen-rte.so.0 > > work but shouldn't it be > > libopen-rte.so.0 -> openmpi/lib/libopen-rte.so.0 > libopen-rte.so -> libopen-rte.so.0 > > Doesn't really matter -- mere cosmetics. You're right but I think we should change this nevertheless. I'll commit a patch. Since it's cosmetic, it can go to the next upload. (Which will be the new upstream version, I guess.) > 4) Should mpi.h be in /usr/include ? I had to tell Rmpi that the main MPI > dir is /usr/lib/openmpi/, then everythings works due to the usual > include/ and lib/ split. Good question. LAM provides a file named mpi.h as well but just installs it in the private include dir. This should work for us as well, though I just spotted that a package named "pgapack" ships a mpi.h file too. Even if we want to handle it via alternatives (which LAM doesn't) we have check the situation in pgapack, so we don't get a problem there. What is the advantage to have mpi.h in /usr/include? (Just curious.) > 5) Some Lintian warnings remain (but I now added two more silencers, so the > last two should go) -- could you try and see why your man page patch > doesn't cover'em ? I know that problem. It seems to be related to the whitespaces in the "program name". I guess that's simply not allowed and not quite sure how to fix that. I'm not so much of a *roff person, to be honest. But I try to figure that out, though it has a low priority in my list. Best regards Manuel
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil