Package Build Report - Fedora Extras Development

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 18:15 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 17:39:03 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 15:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, den 05.05.2005, 08:35 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: 

> > > 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.
> 
> Sure it's nuts, but a temporary (!) work-around I could think of.
Well, AFAICT, something is broken elsewhere, either in rpm, the
buildsystem or inside of the GLU's packaging.

> Both libGLU.so.1()(64bit) and libGL.so.1()(64bit) virtual provides do exist.
The actual question here is: 
What does "provides: libGLU.so.1" mean?

> > > (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
> 
> You get both times xorg-x11-devel, IIRC, but with different arch.
> 
> > say, rsp. what does 
> > "rpm -q --whatprovides libGLU.so"
> > 
> > with a both versions of libGLU.so installed report?
> 
> No package would ever provide that as a SONAME. Only querying
> the actual files with complete paths [as above] works.
Sorry, I meant
rpm -q --whatprovides libGLU.so.1

Ralf