libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found that
it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora 9.

[rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
[rishi@freebook ~]$

Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?

Cheers,
Debarshi

----
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/467894

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 09:42:53 +0530
"Debarshi Ray" <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> wrote:

> I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found that
> it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora 9.
>
> [rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
> libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
> [rishi@freebook ~]$
>
> Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?

Neither libglade nor libglade-devel include the %{_libdir}/libglade
directory or anything within it.

It's an old Gnome-1 compat package and the vast majority of people
won't have it on their systems anyway, though the same appears to apply
to its successor libglade2 as well.

Paul.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

> It's an old Gnome-1 compat package and the vast majority of people
> won't have it on their systems anyway, though the same appears to apply
> to its successor libglade2 as well.

You mean libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64 is an old Gnome-1 compat
package? Or were you referring to something else?

Cheers,
Debarshi

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:21:28 +0530
"Debarshi Ray" <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> wrote:

> > It's an old Gnome-1 compat package and the vast majority of people
> > won't have it on their systems anyway, though the same appears to
> > apply to its successor libglade2 as well.
>
> You mean libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64 is an old Gnome-1 compat
> package? Or were you referring to something else?

I was referring to libglade.

Paul.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

>> I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found that
>> it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora 9.
>>
>> [rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
>> libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
>> [rishi@freebook ~]$
>>
>> Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?

> Neither libglade nor libglade-devel include the %{_libdir}/libglade
> directory or anything within it.

Maybe I was not very clear. I used "libglade" to mean the any of the
libglade packages -- 1.0 and 2.0.

My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to put a
symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have 'Requires:
libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a bit odd to me
since it looks related to libglade.

Cheerio,
Debarshi

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:43:15 +0530
"Debarshi Ray" <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found
> >> that it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora
> >> 9.
> >>
> >> [rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
> >> libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
> >> [rishi@freebook ~]$
> >>
> >> Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?
>
> > Neither libglade nor libglade-devel include the %{_libdir}/libglade
> > directory or anything within it.
>
> Maybe I was not very clear. I used "libglade" to mean the any of the
> libglade packages -- 1.0 and 2.0.
>
> My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to put a
> symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have 'Requires:
> libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a bit odd to me
> since it looks related to libglade.

You either need to own the directory yourself (probably the best bet of
you don't need libgnomecanvas otherwise), or add a dep on
libgnomecanvas, and add a comment in the spec that libgnomecanvas is
only needed for ownership of %{_libdir}/libglade{,/2.0}.

There's actually another option, which would be to add a dependency on
the directory itself, which would be satisfied by any package that
claimed ownership of that directory. That approach is frowned upon
though because it means that depsolvers need to download the large
filelists data to find an appropriate package to resolve the dependency.

Paul.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

Debarshi Ray wrote, at 11/07/2008 09:13 PM +9:00:

I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found that
it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora 9.

[rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
[rishi@freebook ~]$

Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?



Neither libglade nor libglade-devel include the %{_libdir}/libglade
directory or anything within it.


Maybe I was not very clear. I used "libglade" to mean the any of the
libglade packages -- 1.0 and 2.0.

My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to put a
symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have 'Requires:
libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a bit odd to me
since it looks related to libglade.


libgnomecanvas has the dependency on libglade-2.0.so.0,
libgnomecanvas.src has "BuildRequires: libglade2-devel", so
I guess %_libdir/libglade{,/2.0} must be owned by libglade2. not
by libgnomecanvas.

Regards,
Mamoru

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:08:10 +0900
Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> wrote:

> Debarshi Ray wrote, at 11/07/2008 09:13 PM +9:00:
> >>> I need to put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ [1] and found
> >>> that it is libgnomecanvas that owns it and not libglade in Fedora
> >>> 9.
> >>>
> >>> [rishi@freebook ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/
> >>> libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
> >>> [rishi@freebook ~]$
> >>>
> >>> Is this how it is supposed to be? Or is this a bug?
> >
> >> Neither libglade nor libglade-devel include the %{_libdir}/libglade
> >> directory or anything within it.
> >
> > Maybe I was not very clear. I used "libglade" to mean the any of the
> > libglade packages -- 1.0 and 2.0.
> >
> > My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to put
> > a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have 'Requires:
> > libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a bit odd to me
> > since it looks related to libglade.
>
> libgnomecanvas has the dependency on libglade-2.0.so.0,
> libgnomecanvas.src has "BuildRequires: libglade2-devel", so
> I guess %_libdir/libglade{,/2.0} must be owned by libglade2. not
> by libgnomecanvas.

You might expect so, but it's not the case:

$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/{,2.0/}
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64

Paul.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

Paul Howarth wrote, at 11/07/2008 10:11 PM +9:00:

My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to put
a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have 'Requires:
libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a bit odd to me
since it looks related to libglade.

libgnomecanvas has the dependency on libglade-2.0.so.0,
libgnomecanvas.src has "BuildRequires: libglade2-devel", so
I guess %_libdir/libglade{,/2.0} must be owned by libglade2. not
by libgnomecanvas.


You might expect so, but it's not the case:

$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/{,2.0/}
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64



So what I am saying is that this is a bug in both libglade2
and libgnomecanvas.

c.f some similar example:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469491

Regards,
Mamoru

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

libgnomecanvas owns %{_libdir}/libglade
 

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:15:07 +0900
Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> wrote:

> Paul Howarth wrote, at 11/07/2008 10:11 PM +9:00:
> >>> My main objective is to know whether a package that is going to
> >>> put a symlink in %{_libdir}/libglade/2.0/ would need to have
> >>> 'Requires: libgnomecanvas' because, if not anything, it looks a
> >>> bit odd to me since it looks related to libglade.
> >> libgnomecanvas has the dependency on libglade-2.0.so.0,
> >> libgnomecanvas.src has "BuildRequires: libglade2-devel", so
> >> I guess %_libdir/libglade{,/2.0} must be owned by libglade2. not
> >> by libgnomecanvas.
> >
> > You might expect so, but it's not the case:
> >
> > $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libglade/{,2.0/}
> > libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
> > libgnomecanvas-2.20.1.1-2.fc9.x86_64
>
>
> So what I am saying is that this is a bug in both libglade2
> and libgnomecanvas.
>
> c.f some similar example:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469491

Yes, I agree.

Paul.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list