[Fedora-packaging] MPI and Fortran drafts

[Patrice Dumas]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 07:18:33PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 18:19 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 03:38:57PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > > Hello again,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > As I have been dealing with quite a few Fortran packages I have realized
> > > that the current laissez-faire mentality may not be enough and a
> > > standard is needed for file placement.
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fortran
> > 
> > Unless I don't recall well, 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FortranModulesDir
> > was accepted as a guideline.
> 
> Actually, this guideline is broken [1], the directory has to be
> versioned [2].
> 
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513985
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483765

This was discussed afterwards, if I recall well, it was said that it was
not necessarily broken at each gfortran release, such that we would do 
rebuild only when we notice a change. In fact it is said as such in the 
guideline:

  Each gfortran release (from 4.1 to 4.2) may lead to an incompatible change in the .mod files. Therefore for each such gfortran update, this issue should be investigated, and a rebuild of the package that provide the .mod asked for on the devel announce file and done by the maintainers if needed. 

Are you unhappy with that? The problem with a versionned directory is 
that it would lead to many unneeded rebuilds since most of the minor gcc
don't break the .mod formats and there are many minor gcc releases.

Personnally, I am not opposed to having a versionned directory. In fact
this would only mean a change in the _fmoddir macro definition, and maybe
somebody willing to organize an automatic rebuild of all the packages 
installing .mod files.

--
Pat