hello,
i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
and i wait always!



best regards
--
Jonathan MERCIER <bioinfornatics@gmail.com>

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 08/20/2010 08:35 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
> hello,
> i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
> and i wait always!

Jonathan,

We're working on your ticket.

One question that I have for you is this:

In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
conflict with the rest of your draft.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 09:30 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway a écrit :
>
> In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
> conflict with the rest of your draft.

oh yes i miss this i go fix, thanks

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 08/23/2010 03:30 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 08/20/2010 08:35 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
>> hello,
>> i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
>> and i wait always!
>
> Jonathan,
>
> We're working on your ticket.
>
> One question that I have for you is this:
>
> In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
> conflict with the rest of your draft.

Slightly related to this question:

Why do you need %{d_libdir} rsp. why isn't %{libdir} sufficent?

Ralf

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 17:48 +0200, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> On 08/23/2010 03:30 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > On 08/20/2010 08:35 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
> >> hello,
> >> i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
> >> and i wait always!
> >
> > Jonathan,
> >
> > We're working on your ticket.
> >
> > One question that I have for you is this:
> >
> > In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
> > conflict with the rest of your draft.
>
> Slightly related to this question:
>
> Why do you need %{d_libdir} rsp. why isn't %{libdir} sufficent?
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging


because for feet with other distribution like debian ubuntu ... i put
header file in /usr/include/d

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 08/23/2010 05:51 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
> Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 17:48 +0200, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
>> On 08/23/2010 03:30 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>>> On 08/20/2010 08:35 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
>>>> hello,
>>>> i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
>>>> and i wait always!
>>>
>>> Jonathan,
>>>
>>> We're working on your ticket.
>>>
>>> One question that I have for you is this:
>>>
>>> In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
>>> conflict with the rest of your draft.
>>
>> Slightly related to this question:
>>
>> Why do you need %{d_libdir} rsp. why isn't %{libdir} sufficent?
>>
>> Ralf
>>
>> --
>> packaging mailing list
>> packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
>
>
> because for feet with other distribution like debian ubuntu ... i put
> header file in /usr/include/d

d_includedir makes sense (header), but libraries?

d_libdir only makes sense if the libraries being produced by "D" are
incompatible to GNU/Linux system library file format conventions.

Or conversely: The language a library in %libdir is being implemented
in, should be irrelevant.


Ralf
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 18:03 +0200, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> On 08/23/2010 05:51 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
> > Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 17:48 +0200, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> >> On 08/23/2010 03:30 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> >>> On 08/20/2010 08:35 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
> >>>> hello,
> >>>> i have do a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/7 since 3 week
> >>>> and i wait always!
> >>>
> >>> Jonathan,
> >>>
> >>> We're working on your ticket.
> >>>
> >>> One question that I have for you is this:
> >>>
> >>> In your template, you do not use %{d_libdir}. Why not? It seems to
> >>> conflict with the rest of your draft.
> >>
> >> Slightly related to this question:
> >>
> >> Why do you need %{d_libdir} rsp. why isn't %{libdir} sufficent?
> >>
> >> Ralf
> >>
> >> --
> >> packaging mailing list
> >> packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> >
> >
> > because for feet with other distribution like debian ubuntu ... i put
> > header file in /usr/include/d
>
> d_includedir makes sense (header), but libraries?
>
> d_libdir only makes sense if the libraries being produced by "D" are
> incompatible to GNU/Linux system library file format conventions.
>
> Or conversely: The language a library in %libdir is being implemented
> in, should be irrelevant.
>
>
> Ralf

oh sorry i read too quicly last time.
I use _d_libdir for file /etc/ldc.conf who need D lib path

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 08/23/2010 02:06 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:

> oh sorry i read too quicly last time.
> I use _d_libdir for file /etc/ldc.conf who need D lib path

Let me be specific:

Why can't the D libraries go into %{_libdir} (/usr/lib || /usr/lib64)?
If they can be parsed by ld.so, then there is no real need for them to
be in a subdirectory.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Le lundi 23 août 2010 à 17:12 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway a écrit :
> On 08/23/2010 02:06 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:
>
> > oh sorry i read too quicly last time.
> > I use _d_libdir for file /etc/ldc.conf who need D lib path
>
> Let me be specific:
>
> Why can't the D libraries go into %{_libdir} (/usr/lib || /usr/lib64)?
> If they can be parsed by ld.so, then there is no real need for them to
> be in a subdirectory.
>
> ~spot

The only reason why i use _d_libdir si for ldc scan d library (only)

But we can put all D lib in libdir

see:
__________________________________________________ _______________________________
$ cat /etc/ldc.conf
// This configuration file uses libconfig.
// See http://www.hyperrealm.com/libconfig/ for syntax details.

// Special macros:
// %%ldcbinarypath%%
// - is replaced with the path to the directory holding the ldc
executable

// The default group is required
default:
{
// 'switches' holds array of string that are appends to the command
line
// arguments before they are parsed.
switches = [
"-I /usr/include/d/",
"-I /usr/include/d/tango",
"-I /usr/include/d/tango/core/vendor",
"-L-L/usr/lib64/d",
"-d-version=Tango",
"-defaultlib=tango",
"-debuglib=tango"
];
};
__________________________________________________ _______________________________


--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 08/23/2010 05:45 PM, Jonathan MERCIER wrote:

> The only reason why i use _d_libdir si for ldc scan d library (only)
>
> But we can put all D lib in libdir
>
> see:
> __________________________________________________ _______________________________
> $ cat /etc/ldc.conf
> // This configuration file uses libconfig.
> // See http://www.hyperrealm.com/libconfig/ for syntax details.
>
> // Special macros:
> // %%ldcbinarypath%%
> // - is replaced with the path to the directory holding the ldc
> executable
>
> // The default group is required
> default:
> {
> // 'switches' holds array of string that are appends to the command
> line
> // arguments before they are parsed.
> switches = [
> "-I /usr/include/d/",
> "-I /usr/include/d/tango",
> "-I /usr/include/d/tango/core/vendor",
> "-L-L/usr/lib64/d",
> "-d-version=Tango",
> "-defaultlib=tango",
> "-debuglib=tango"
> ];
> };

Seems pretty pointless. How painful would it be to have it simply put
the libraries in %{_libdir} and never pass any -L?

Will all D packages need to be patched to support this? Are they
hardcoded to expect /usr/lib64/d ?

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging