[Bug 514931] Please build ruby-RMagick for EPEL 5

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Aug 1 16:17:08 UTC 2009


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


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514931


Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED




--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>  2009-08-01 12:17:07 EDT ---
Well,

* ruby(abi)
  - All ruby related packages must have "Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8"
    ( And I usually recomend to add also "BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8"
      for consistency ).

* ImageMagick Dependency
  - Due to bug 500565 (i.e due to the function 
    static void test_Magick_version(void) in ext/RMagick/rmmain.c),
    when ruby-RMagick is rebuilt with ImageMagick 6.2.8.0, RMagick
    will require ImageMagick 6.2.8.X

    ( i.e. even if the soname of the library in ImageMagick won't change 
           between 6.2.8.X and 6.2.9.Y, RMagick rebuilt with ImageMagick
           6.2.8.X won't work with ImageMagick 6.2.9.Y (by default) ). 

* htmldoc
  - Would you explain why you pass "--disable-htmldoc" to configure?
    ( By the way it seems that creating html documents also fixes
      shebangs automatically )
  ! By the way as far as I am correct "BR: libwmf" is needed when creating
    html documents, would you check that?

* configure v.s. setup.rb
  - Well, I think if "configure -> make" is used to compile RMagick,
    "make install" or so should be used to install files.

    If you use "ruby setup.rb install", perhaps "ruby setup.rb config/setup"
    or so is preferable instead of "configure -> make".

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list