[Bug 403741] Review Request: OpenEXR_CTL - A simplified OpenEXR interface to CTL

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: OpenEXR_CTL - A simplified OpenEXR interface to CTL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=403741





------- Additional Comments From kwizart at gmail.com  2008-01-09 10:31 EST -------
About the Capitalization problem, I would say it's strange but it have some sense...
I think the real package names are OpenEXR but because it can also be compiled
on win32 they left the capitalization...
Actually i'm close to have OpenEXR_Viewers ready for review and the package name
(defined in configure.ac) is OpenEXR_Viewers which means they install doc in
%{_datadir}/doc/OpenEXR_Viewers-%{version}.
same are the pkgconfig files that are named OpenEXR.pc CTL.pc and OpenEXR_CTL.pc
here.

About the pkgconfig problem (do you have the pkgconfig patch I've added later?):
Because not all libs are used when linking there is lot of
unused-direct-shlib-dependencies (rpmlint OpenEXR-libs on installed files ). I
would say it would be interesting to clean them. 
There were also a undefined-non-weak symbol (fixed by the pkgconfig patch) that
prevent it to be linked from OpenEXR_Viewers...(CTL libs was missing).

I first thought it was due to the CTL 1.4.1 been used with OpenEXR 1.6.0
(instead of 1.6.1). But it seems to work. So I wonder if it worth the case to
have OpenEXR updated to 1.6.1 in F-8 (seems bugfixes), What do you think about
updating OpenEXR for F-8 ?!

The FE-LEGAL has been discussed in http://bugzilla.redhat.com/357461
Tom said it was "Free, but GPL incompatible".



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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.