Bug 102211
Summary: | SRPM build fails reporting an undefined reference | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Raw Hide | Reporter: | Michael Lee Yohe <michael> |
Component: | ncurses | Assignee: | Eido Inoue <havill> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Jay Turner <jturner> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 1.0 | CC: | srevivo |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | i386 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2003-08-13 16:46:56 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Michael Lee Yohe
2003-08-12 16:17:25 UTC
Looks like you have a standard Red Hat Linux 9 updated with errata WITH THE EXCEPTION of the compiler (current is 3.2.2-5). Was able to rebuild the package using the supported packages. Should there not be a BuildRequires in there somewhere specifying which package is not the latest and greatest? I mean, theoretically - if my system passes all BuildRequires it's supposed to build. Your compiler is more recent than the current supported version. As for why it didn't compile: this could be a bug in the later version of gcc, or it could be that gcc has gotten "stricter" or more "correct" about linking requirements. When we support a newer version of gcc, we will ensure that all of our packages can be built with it. > I mean, theoretically - if my system passes all BuildRequires it's supposed to
build.
No-- there far more variables that affect whether or not something will build;
while we try our best to make packages as flexible as possible and build on as
many arches and even distros as possible, there's no way we can QA any package
outside of the "supported environment"-- as the amount of possibilities (flawed
packages from outside sources, etc) to test against would be infinite.
|