--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 41 from Frama-C-discuss on October 2010 ---
Pascal Believe it or not there were no patches necessary to complete the build. I probably need to add the Debian patches. Because of the way RPM works, the src.rpm file contains a copy of all source patch files, and automatically patches the source then compiles the binary .rpm files. As I said, it did not require any patches to compile and integrate. Mark Rader Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:41:48 +0200 From: Pascal Cuoq <pascal.cuoq at gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Frama-c-discuss] Fedora 13 and 14 To: Frama-C public discussion <frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr> Message-ID: <AANLkTim7FNuVjnPYKzhRSEyp-ZCeyRrAUJX_O1FydJn5 at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello, > We have developed a Fedora 13 and 14 package of frama-c boron.? We also have > an integrated why package that should be available in a couple of weeks. > The why package is operational but it takes time to get it into the fedora > system. This is excellent news. Speaking (in another thread) of patches, is there a webpage for patches that were necessary for integration in Fedora? Debian has such a page, and in case you didn't notice them yet, the patches there are either originating from the development version or have already been merged into the development version. In other words, these patches are highly recommended. http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/frama-c/20100401+boron+dfsg-5 We do not really have the resources for maintaining ourselves a stable version in addition to the development version, but if we had, it would very much look like Boron with these patches applied. Pascal ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Frama-c-discuss mailing list Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss End of Frama-c-discuss Digest, Vol 29, Issue 13 ***********************************************