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

Re: rpms/sextractor/FC-4 sextractor.spec,1.2,1.3

On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 15:12 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> My apologies; I'm resending this because I mistyped the address of the
> SExtractor maintainer.
> >>>>> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de> writes:
> RC> On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 10:24 -0700, Sergio Pascual wrote:
> >> %build -%configure +%configure CFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -funroll-loops
> >> -fomit-frame-pointer -O1
> RC> You are breaking debug infos.
> Yes, this is not good.
During a review, this would be a BLOCKER and would cause a package not
to be accepted.

I am not willing to let maintainers get away with such stuff

>   For reference, the bug which prompted this is
> here:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199700 
> The problem is that the code simply does not function with the default
> Fedora optimization flags.  I am not familiar with the software and
> have no idea whether this points to a GCC problem or just poorly
> written code.  Someone should investigate the minimum change to the
> stock Fedora cflags which permit this software to work properly, and
> then investigate why the behavior differs.
> Is there a standard method for overriding a single flag in
> %{optflags}?

The way he does it is the way how things are supposed to work.

The problem is what he does: -fomit-frame-pointer


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