On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 10:41:47AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 02:25:07AM -0800, Manish Singh wrote: > > > A gimp-devel package *must* have a dependency that either directly or > > indirectly pulls in glib-devel. If it doesn't, the package's dependency > > specification is broken. > > > SuSE has a history of being shoddy in this regard, other examples that > > have affected gimp are glib-devel not requiring pkg-config, aalib being > > linked against slang but not requiring slang-devel, and a few more I > > can't recall off the top of my head right now. > > For Open SuSE 10: > > # rpm -q -R -p gimp-devel-2.2.8-6.i586.rpm > gtk2-devel > glib2-devel > glibc-devel > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > rpmlib(PayloadIsBzip2) <= 3.0.5-1 > > # rpm -q -R -p glib2-devel-2.8.1-3.i586.rpm > glib2 = 2.8.1 > pkgconfig > glibc-devel > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > /bin/sh > /usr/bin/perl > libc.so.6 > libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) > libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) > libglib-2.0.so.0 > libgobject-2.0.so.0 > rpmlib(PayloadIsBzip2) <= 3.0.5-1 > > Are you saying the above is incorrect? How so?
That looks fine with regards to -devel package dependencies. The original person who had the problem is using SuSE 9.2, which obviously is missing some of the above. However, gimp-devel should also depend on gimp itself, so yes, the above has missing dependencies. -Yosh _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
