[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #24 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-11-09 06:41:12 EDT --- Jason, thanks for bringing it once again to my attention. fltk2 is broken in several POVs. It's not released software (but apps are using it), it's not progressing much (just humble changes in SVN tree), fltk2 as a shared lib is not supported (static is), so, that's why there are so much so-related problems. From dillo m-l I know that fltk2 is dying in favor of fltk1.3, which should have release soon (whatever it meens...) and then dillo might move to this fltk implementation. I have no time no interest in fixing what's broken by design. If anyone needs fltk2 for dillo, feel free to use this RPMs, they works but I won't update to newer snapshots anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #23 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-11-07 23:13:02 EDT --- Just FYI, outside of the rpmlint complaints posted in comment 17, there are also a very large number of undefined-non-weak-symbol complaints along with a few unused-direct-shlib-dependency warnings. There are a couple hundred complaints in total; to see them, install the package and run rpmlint fltk2. It is possible that these aren't problematic; the undefined-non-weak-symbol complaints indicate that you can't make use of the library without also linking to the libraries which provide those symbols. Bad practise and good to fix if possible, but probably not a serious issue. The unused-direct-shlib-dependency complaints indicate that the libraries in question are linked against various libraries but don't actually call into them. Again, this may not be problematic; if there aren't any extra dependencies caused by this and the libraries are going to be in memory anyway. You should check those and verify that there aren't any actual problems indicated. The versioning of this package doesn't seem to follow Fedora guidelines, although I can't really tell. What do you expect the actual release version to be? If it's 2.0.0 or something, then note that you'll have to use epoch to keep ordering. because '0' (or indeed any digit) is less than 'x'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #22 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-09-17 05:54:01 EDT --- Thanks for the heads up. Fixed and updated to newest snapshot. http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.17.r6858.fc12.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Till Maas opensou...@till.name changed: What|Removed |Added CC||opensou...@till.name --- Comment #21 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2009-09-16 16:41:20 EDT --- The upstream status of the patches is missing: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #20 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-08-03 04:23:57 EDT --- Updated to r6834: http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.14.r6834.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #19 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-07-20 05:57:06 EDT --- http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.13.r6829.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #18 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-07-01 07:13:36 EDT --- http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.12.r6793.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #17 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-06-17 09:24:53 EDT --- Thanks for tips Michael, I finally figured it all out: %changelog * Wed Jun 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.11.r6786 - disabling the workaroung for fedora 11 * Wed Jun 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.10.r6786 - rpath killer - ® sign killer * Wed Jun 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.9.r6786 - setting correct soname * Wed Jun 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.8.r6786 - rebuild * Wed Jun 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.7.r6786 - fltk-2.0.x-r6786-scandir-workaround.patch to workaroung glibc-2.10 non standard behavior * Tue Jun 16 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.6.r6786 - r6786 - fltk-2.0.x-r6671-non-silence-build.patch new...@dhcp-lab-124 SPECS $ rpmlint /home/newman/rpmbuild/SRPMS/fltk2-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.src.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/fltk2-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/fltk2-devel-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/fltk2-doc-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/fltk2-debuginfo-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.x86_64.rpm fltk2.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfltk2.so.2.0 e...@glibc_2.2.5 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.11.r6786.fc11.src.rpm dillo-2.1 (pre-release) compilation run tested against this version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-03-24 12:13:28 EDT --- The SONAMEs you set are bad. Example: SONAMELibrary soname: [../lib/libfltk2.so.2.0] Must not contain any path and not the trailing minor version either: libfltk2.so.2 [...] Please delete .SILENT from the top-level makeincludes file fragment, so the build output becomes verbose. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #14 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-03-16 18:24:54 EDT --- * Mon Mar 16 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.4.r6671 - snapshot 6671 -- http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.4.r6671.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #15 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-03-16 20:41:30 EDT --- * Tue Mar 17 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.5.r6671 - soname patch http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.src.rpm -- Fixed problem with missing soname but still there's some problem with symlinks I am no able to figure out. Anyone? newman BUILD $ rpmlint ../SPECS/fltk2.spec /home/newman/rpmbuild/SRPMS/fltk2-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.src.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.i386.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-devel-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.i386.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.i386.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-doc-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.i386.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-debuginfo-2.0.x-0.5.r6671.fc10.i386.rpm fltk2.i386: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libfltk2_images.so.2.0 fltk2.i386: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libfltk2_glut.so.2.0 fltk2.i386: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libfltk2_gl.so.2.0 fltk2.i386: E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libfltk2.so.2.0 fltk2.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libfltk2.so.2.0 e...@glibc_2.0 6 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #13 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-03-09 17:09:37 EDT --- * Mon Mar 9 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.3.r6525 - dumped doc's dependency on main pkg -- http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.3.r6525.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net Flag|needinfo?(bugs.mich...@gmx. | |net)| --- Comment #12 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-03-07 04:20:53 EDT --- Not sure what you mean. The whole sub-package seems to you useless, or you're pointing to the 'Require:' field? The latter. Why does a plain -doc package require the main library pkg? If it's just packager's personal preference, I would understand if it required the -devel package instead. Else it shouldn't require the library pkg as it doesn't need it in any way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683
--- Comment #11 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-01-16 04:05:40 EDT
---
http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2.spec
http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/fltk2-2.0.x-0.2.r6525.fc10.src.rpm
--
* Wed Jan 14 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com - 2.0.x-0.2.r6525
- use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead of %%{buildroot}
- added library header files directories to %%files section
- fixed bad field in -doc sub-package to contain BR field
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683
Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(bugs.mich...@gmx.
||net)
--- Comment #10 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-01-14 14:40:32 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #9)
* The guidelines want you to choose either %buildroot or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, not
both.
OK. Will be fixed.
* Use install -p ... especially when installing files yourself.
It's only in commented lines, will be removed completely in new revision.
* Unowned directories alarm in -devel package! It can easily be seen that the
following %files entries are missing:
Will fix.
%package doc
Summary: Doxygen documentation for FLTK2
Group: Documentation
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Why that?
Not sure what you mean. The whole sub-package seems to you useless, or you're
pointing to the 'Require:' field?
To the first point: it's 2.2 MB more data, which are not directly useful.
To the second one: sure it can be avoided, no problem here.
BuildRoot: doxygen
Uh? A typo, most likely. Make that BuildRequires: doxygen
Typo.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||fltk2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683
--- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-01-13
14:30:55 EDT ---
Just skimming over the spec file:
* The guidelines want you to choose either %buildroot or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, not
both.
* Use install -p ... especially when installing files yourself.
* Unowned directories alarm in -devel package! It can easily be seen that the
following %files entries are missing:
%dir %{_includedir}/%{project_name}
%dir %{_includedir}/%{project_name}/compat
%dir %{_includedir}/%{project_name}/compat/FL
%package doc
Summary: Doxygen documentation for FLTK2
Group: Documentation
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Why that?
BuildRoot: doxygen
Uh? A typo, most likely. Make that BuildRequires: doxygen
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||467292 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #6 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2008-12-23 07:23:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Is there any explanation of why the existing fltk package can't just be updated? * FLTK2 - is unstable, fast moving target - long way to stabilization - come concerns on its future, because of FLTK1.3 line now having some FLTK2 features and is considered being merge of FLTK1+2 * FLTK1 - only bug-fixes - stable API Upgrading FLTK to version 2 means breakage of API/ABI and also regressions: However, the momentum of the FLTK-1.1.x development meant that there are many bug-fixes in 1.1.x that are not available in 2.0. see: http://fltk.org/articles.php?L825+I0+TFAQ+P1+Q -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2008-12-23 10:30:19 EDT --- Well, given that, surely you anticipated the followup question: If there's concern for its future, and it's that unstable and buggy, why do we want it in Fedora in the first place? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #8 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2008-12-23 18:29:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) If there's concern for its future, and it's that unstable and buggy, why do we want it in Fedora in the first place? There's a concern from my POV on FLTK2's *short*-term future w.r.t. its API/ABI stability, because it's released thru snapshots only but that's something we don't care much, OpenSSL used to break ABI every its second release. Rapidly changing library might be a problem for Fedora in case we have a lot of FLTK2-dependent apps, which we don't have; Dillo2 should be the first and most demanded one. From my experience with Dillo2, FLTK2 behaves quite nice, I wouldn't say it's unstable w.r.t core library (on API/ABI I have elaborated already) buggy -- it's supported upstream (read its FLTK 2.0.x Weekly Snapshot reports). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #1 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2008-12-22 17:11:53 EDT --- Known problems http://fltk.org/str.php?L2109 W: no-soname /usr/lib/libfltk2* -- provide SONAME for FLTK2 libs http://fltk.org/str.php?L2111 W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libfltk2.so.2.0 and perhaps http://fltk.org/str.php?L2110 E: no-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib/libfltk2* -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #2 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2008-12-22 17:24:45 EDT --- That looks like the SONAME problem :( fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 from /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: libfltk2.so is needed by package fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 (/home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm) fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 from /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: libfltk2_images.so is needed by package fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 (/home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm) Error: Missing Dependency: libfltk2.so is needed by package fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 (/home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm) Error: Missing Dependency: libfltk2_images.so is needed by package fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386 (/home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/fltk2-fluid-2.0.x-0.1.r6525.fc10.i386.rpm) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2008-12-22 20:45:12 EDT --- Is there any explanation of why the existing fltk package can't just be updated? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2008-12-22 22:40:47 EDT --- ahem, yes, this looks pretty familiar alright. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477683] Review Request: fltk2 - C++ user interface toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2008-12-22 22:47:28 EDT --- ok, double checked, hopefully these fltk v1 and fltk2 can be installed in parallel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
