Bug 159324
| Summary: | libswt3-gtk2 broken softlink and missing bugzilla | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | John Ellson <john.ellson> |
| Component: | eclipse | Assignee: | Andrew Overholt <overholt> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | eclipse-bugs |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | 3.1.1-1jpp_1fc.FC4.4 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2005-12-03 16:09:32 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 159880 | ||
|
Description
John Ellson
2005-06-01 17:19:20 UTC
Hmm. The relevant line from the specfile is this:
ln -sf
%{_datadir}/%{name}/plugins/org.eclipse.swt.gtk.linux.%{eclipse_arch}_%{eclipse_majmin}.%{eclipse_micro}.jar
swt-gtk-%{eclipse_majmin}.%{eclipse_micro}.jar
Maybe %{eclipse_arch} isn't being set up properly on x86_64?
Is this still an issue? The boken softlink has been fixed. There is still no bugzilla entry for libswt* Thanks. I don't think there will ever be an entry for libswt* because it's a sub-package of the Eclipse SRPM and I'm pretty sure that entries are for SRPMs only. You could file a bug against the Bugzilla component if you'd like to see this changed but I'm pretty sure it's automated. Closing CURRENTRELEASE. (In reply to comment #1) >Hmm. The relevant line from the specfile is this: >ln -sf >%{_datadir}/%{name}/plugins/org.eclipse.swt.gtk.linux.%{eclipse_arch}_%{eclipse_majmin}.%{eclipse_micro}.jar >swt-gtk-%{eclipse_majmin}.%{eclipse_micro}.jar >Maybe %{eclipse_arch} isn't being set up properly on x86_64? Wow, nice. |