[Bug 501924] Review Request: mingw32-tcl - MinGW Windows Tool Command Language

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501924





--- Comment #4 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora at vanpienbroek.nl>  2009-05-21 14:38:17 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Thanks for taking! That was quick!

I'm waiting for somebody to review my review requests, so it's best to do other
reviews in return :)

> > For readability, you might want to move this piece of code to the top of the
> > .spec file:
> >  # don't run "make test" by default
> >  %{?_without_check: %define _without_check 0}
> >  %{!?_without_check: %define _without_check 1}
> 
> This is again from the native spec file. I kept it there to minimize the
> differences. So the %check section could probably completely go...

Yeah, I've also seen it in the native spec file. However, I still think such
pieces of code need to be near the top of .spec files as it helps people who
are manually rebuilding the package to find out there's an option to enable the
testsuite. Right now, it's hidden somewhere in the .spec file and easily
overlooked.

> > Is the rename of the import libraries from .a to .dll.a really necessary?
> > AFAIK, this is only needed for libtool based libraries (which tcl isn't)
> 
> I don't think the renaming is strictly necessary. I did it to make it extra
> clear that the .a files are implibs, not static libraries...

Have you tried compiling TCL-based applications (or other libraries) against
this package to test whether the compiler can find the .dll.a file? (Normally
libtool takes care of that, but as TCL isn't libtool based it's best to verify
this)

-- 
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.