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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Octave package standard

Orion Poplawski wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Hash: SHA1

Orion Poplawski wrote:

- Currently octave uses the /usr/libexec tree to install the .oct files.
 These are really shared libraries.  It does use an arch/api versioned
directory, e.g.:


Some other package files (PKG_ADD/PKG_DEL) get added there too.

This is the only part that needs more clarification to me.  If the .oct
files are really shared libraries it seems that they belong in
%{_libdir}.  libexec is more useful for binaries that shouldn't be
multilib like helper programs that are invoked by other programs on the
system and need to match arch with the invoking program for them to work

Well, it would be trivial to change /usr/libexec to /usr/lib. Multi-lib is then handled by the arch string farther down. Similar to java in /usr/lib/jvm/java/jre/lib/amd64/. Using %{_libdir} would be harder and I'm not sure for what gain. These are all dlopen libraries only for octave so as long as it knows where to go, that's okay.

I also just updated the noarch spec to install from the source tarball directly. The package install script simply unpacks that tarball into the temp directory then. This assumes that nothing in the source needs patching.

Any final thoughts on this? I'd like to get this decided before a final release of octave 3.0 is made (soon now). Personally, I'd like to leave it as libexec since we may need to put some arch dependent executables there too.

Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion cora nwra com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com

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