Hi,
I just corrected the wording on the MPI Guideline from "NO library configuration (in /etc/ld.so.conf.d) MUST be made" to "library configuration (in /etc/ld.so.conf.d) MUST NOT be made" which is clearer and has the same meaning (it was in the FESCo discussion [1]). I hope that this updated version can be moved to the Packaging Guidelines along with the other guidelines approved today.
[1] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-14/fedora-meeting.20... 17:20:21 <jds2001> #topic FPC Items 17:20:26 <jds2001> .fesco 241 17:20:29 <jds2001> MPI? 17:20:42 <jds2001> There was something on the page that was confusing to me, let me find it. 17:21:24 <jds2001> ahh - Each MPI build of shared libraries SHOULD have a separate -libs subpackage for the libraries (e.g. foo-mpich2-libs). As in the case of MPI compilers, NO library configuration (in /etc/ld.so.conf.d) MUST be made. 17:21:25 <nirik> +1 here for MPI. It makes sense to me... 17:21:59 <jds2001> that seems to be as "library configuration in /etc/ld.so.conf.d MUST NOT be made"
On 08/14/2009 12:53 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Hi,
I just corrected the wording on the MPI Guideline from "NO library configuration (in /etc/ld.so.conf.d) MUST be made" to "library configuration (in /etc/ld.so.conf.d) MUST NOT be made" which is clearer and has the same meaning (it was in the FESCo discussion [1]). I hope that this updated version can be moved to the Packaging Guidelines along with the other guidelines approved today.
Thanks Jussi (both for the correction and mentioning it here). The meaning is the same so this should be fine.
-Toshio
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org