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

[Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169704





------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald gmail com  2006-02-27 10:38 EST -------
The CAML light part of the license says "The user undertakes not to carry out
any paying distribution of the software." while allowing for cost of
reproduction. Don't know if this non commercial clause is too restrictive.

The .sos do not seem to have any versioning, mosml does this a different wa?

rpmlint complains about several shlib-with-non-pic-code and linking problems
like the following example:

E: mosml-pg shlib-with-non-pic-code /usr/lib/mosml/lib/libmpq.so
The listed shared libraries contain object code that was compiled
without -fPIC. All object code in shared libraries should be
recompiled separately from the static libraries with the -fPIC option.

Another common mistake that causes this problem is linking with
``gcc -Wl,-shared'' instead of ``gcc -shared''.

E: mosml-pg library-not-linked-against-libc /usr/lib/mosml/lib/libmpq.so


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


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