Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lostirc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200662 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-13 15:36 EST ------- I'm getting a build failure in development: g++ -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -Wall -o lostirc main.o MainWindow.o MainNotebook.o Tab.o Prefs.o ServerWindow.o GuiCommands.o Entry.o StatusBar.o TextWidget.o NickList.o DCCList.o ../libirc/libirc.a -L/lib64 -lgtkmm-2.4 -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdkmm-2.4 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lpangocairo-1.0 -lcairo -latkmm-1.6 -latk-1.0 -lpangomm-1.4 -lglibmm-2.4 -lpango-1.0 -lsigc-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../lib64/libgdk-x11-2.0.so: undefined reference to `cairo_xlib_surface_create_for_bitmap' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../lib64/libgdk-x11-2.0.so: undefined reference to `cairo_xlib_surface_create' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../lib64/libgdk-x11-2.0.so: undefined reference to `cairo_xlib_surface_set_size' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status This is the second build failure I've had like this today; I think my tree is busted. It builds fine on FC5. I'm seeing two .desktop files installed: fedora-listirc.desktop and lostirc.desktop. It looks like the package installs its own desktop file and then the second one gets installed when you call desktop-file-install. I guess you'll need to delete lostirc.desktop. * source files match upstream: 501cd56bc0740d599540fb415718b939 lostirc-0.4.6.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (FC5, x86_64). * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: lostirc = 0.4.6-2.fc5 = /bin/sh libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libatkmm-1.6.so.1()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdkmm-2.4.so.1()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglibmm-2.4.so.1()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtkmm-2.4.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangomm-1.4.so.1()(64bit) libsigc-2.0.so.0()(64bit) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. Manual testing shows that the package runs fine. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets present are OK (gtk-update-icon-cache * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. X problems with desktop file installation. * locale files installed; %find_lang called properly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
