https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2054
--- Comment #2 from Richard <hobbes1...@gmail.com> 2011-12-11 21:31:17 CET --- > - mixed use of %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (in desktop-file-install) Ahh, that one was encased in {}, I do a global sub in vi but I forgot about that one. Fixed > - new version was tagged today I've already got builds in progress for testing. Once I verify everythings OK, I'll post them here. > - OCE overrides Fedora's -O2 to -O3, IMHO we should prefer the -O2, seems to > be > connected to the "build type" Release vs. RelWithDebInfo (I'd use this) vs. > ... Ok, here's an area I'm totally lost. I know the "O" setting has to do with optimization, but is O3 bad? > OCE-visualization.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit > /usr/lib64/libTKService.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > OCE-visualization.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit > /usr/lib64/libTKOpenGl.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > OCE-foundation.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit > /usr/lib64/libTKAdvTools.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > OCE-foundation.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libTKernel.so.1.0.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > => you can't do probably nothing with this Nope, but I did report it: https://github.com/tpaviot/oce/issues/161 > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/tdoc 0644L /bin/sh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/test2xl 0644L /bin/sh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/idoc 0644L /bin/sh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/vmdltest 0644L /bin/sh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/demo 0644L /bin/csh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/mdltest 0644L /bin/sh > OCE-foundation.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/oce-0.7.0/src/DrawResources/mkdoc 0644L /bin/csh > => do the files need to be installed at all? No clue. I don't need them for FreeCAD but it installs them, presumably as examples so they shouldn't be executable. I think this is ignoreable, but what's your opinion? > OCE-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on OCE/OCE-libs/libOCE > => it depends on all the library subpackages I effectively got this from your package (and you got it from the Debian structure?) from OCC. I think it's complaining because there's no OCE base package, instead it's OCE-foundation. I think we can ignore this. > OCE-devel.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/include/oce/MeshVS_MeshPrsBuilder.lxx > OCE-devel.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/include/oce/AppBlend_Line.lxx > => bug or feature? I think they will contain something at some point. This is a known issue upstream and doesn't really hurt the package. > OCE-visualization.x86_64: W: no-documentation > OCE-ocaf.x86_64: W: no-documentation > OCE-modeling.x86_64: W: no-documentation > => developer documentation is removed in OCE It is, but I think it can be built, either way it would go into OCE-devel, not the individual packages, no? > many unused-direct-shlib-dependency warnings on installed packages => maybe > using -Wl,--as-needed could solve it I'm not a programmer so I'll try it and see what happens :) Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.