Greg,
2) The tests all fail because they have #! lines with /bin/bash.
Should be addressed per https://github.com/OSGeo/shapelib/pull/150
could document a dependency on bash, and then find bash with configure
and substitute it, that all seems quite avoidable as I don't see
anything in the test scripts that really need non-POSIX sh features.
With the bash problem worked around, most tests pass, except
FAIL: tests/shpproj.sh
======================
../test-driver: ./tests/shpproj.sh: not found
FAIL tests/shpproj.sh (exit status: 127)
and I don't see that in the tarball, so I'm guessing that isn't a
problem only I am seeing.
shapelib doesn't depend on proj, so perhaps there needs to be
documentation of tests dependencies?
I don't reproduce that error (shpproj.sh used to test a shpproj.c
utility that was removed during the PROJ6 transition, so this is a
remains of a more complete tests, but it has the virtue of testing a few
of the contrib/ utilities that have no tests otherwise)
4) I undid the kludge in 1, and I get a failure to build, because make
fires the rule for one of the programs first, and libshp.la isn't built
yet. Running again with gmake instead, it builds. So there's something
wrong, but I suspect it's wiser to work around this by documenting that
GNU Make is required.
The automake/autoconf build system doesn't not receive much love this
days (but should not be worse or better that it used to be). Perhaps we
should remove it at some point.
5) There are a surprisingly large number of programs in bin. The pkgsrc
package didn't used to install them, but they look like that likely
won't conflict with other pacakges.. Do you think users of shapelib
expect all of these to be installed?
No opinion here. I hardly use myself any of the shapelib utils. I see
Debian ships all of them
(https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/shapelib/filelist), but some of
them come from the contrib/ area (which doesn't necessarily means they
are worse qualities than other non-contrib utilities). I came much later
to the party, so I don't have much historical background to provide.
Nothing of the above seems to be 1.6.1 specific, so I don't think it
deserves a new RC
Even
--
http://www.spatialys.com
My software is free, but my time generally not.
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
