Create tomsfastmath formula, and use it for clamav
#101420
Conversation
| depends_on "libtool" => :build | ||
|
|
||
| # Fixes some issues in `makefile.shared`, remove on next release. | ||
| patch :DATA |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The changes in this patch were already done upstream, but a release with the changes hasn't been made yet.
| desc "Fast large integer arithmetic library written in portable ISO C" | ||
| homepage "https://www.libtom.net/TomsFastMath/" | ||
| url "https://github.com/libtom/tomsfastmath/releases/download/v0.13.1/tfm-0.13.1.tar.xz" | ||
| sha256 "47c97a1ada3ccc9fcbd2a8a922d5859a84b4ba53778c84c1d509c1a955ac1738" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm aware that there should be a license here, but I'm not sure what to put. The current development branch is under the Unlicense, but the latest release (0.13.1) is dual-licensed under some custom public domain dedication and the WTFPL. See https://github.com/libtom/tomsfastmath/blob/v0.13.1/LICENSE.
What should I do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done: libtom/tomsfastmath#29
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My issue hasn't received any response, so I think we can put the dual license of the 0.13.1 release here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done. Is :public_domain appropriate for a custom public domain dedication?
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. |
|
Bump, waiting for answers for my questions above. |
triallax
force-pushed
the
tomsfastmath-0.13.1
branch
from
0cd60a1 to
ee55917
Compare
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. |
|
Bump, again. |
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. |
triallax
force-pushed
the
tomsfastmath-0.13.1
branch
from
ee55917 to
abc41e4
Compare
|
Bump, see question above. |
brew install --build-from-source <formula>, where<formula>is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew test <formula>, where<formula>is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew audit --strict <formula>(after doingbrew install --build-from-source <formula>)? If this is a new formula, does it passbrew audit --new <formula>?See #100780 (comment).
The test I wrote fails on 12-arm64, but I can't reproduce locally. Help would be appreciated.