[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package Build Report - Fedora Extras Development



On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 15:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 05.05.2005, 08:35 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: 
> > The following packages failed to build on Fedora Extras Development:
> > [...] 
> > Coin2
> > [...] 
> > See: http://extras64.linux.duke.edu/failed/development/
> > for logs.
> 
> Seth, on x86_64 the buildsystem/mach/yum installs the 32-bit version of
> libGLU (xorg-x11-Mesa-libGLU-6.8.2-1.FC3.13.i386) and not the 64bit-
> version (xorg-x11-Mesa-libGLU-6.8.2-1.FC3.13.x86_64) for the
> "BuildRequire libGLU.so.1". The build fails due to that. I wanted to
> look into this already known problem but did not find the time/it got
> lost. Sorry for that.
> 
> So, how do we fix that?
By Seth fixing his build system.

>  I'm a bit unsure. I suppose (but did not try)
> that the build system would install the x86_64 Version if we would
> 
> BuildRequires: libGLU >= 1
> 
> as suggested by mharris in 
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2005-March/msg00128.html
> But this only works in devel :-(
> 
> Another way to fix maybe would be to do a 
> 
> %ifarch x86_64
> BuildRequires: libGLU.so.1()((64bit)
> %else
> BuildRequires: libGLU.so.1
> %endif
Sorry, but that's nuts -  rpm must handle this case by itself.

> (was suggested my Michael Schwendt iirc). Also untested and imho ugly. 
> 
> Or do you consider it as a buildsystem/yum bug?

Well I am not sure, as I don't have access to i68_64 systems.

What does 
rpm -qf /usr/lib/libGLU.so
and
rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libGLU.so

say, rsp. what does 
"rpm -q --whatprovides libGLU.so"

with a both versions of libGLU.so installed report?

> Why does this problem only show up with this package (or are
> there others I missed?).
Many possibilities.

Ralf



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]