Bug 160713

Summary:	Missing/Incorrect BuildRequires
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Andreas Thienemann <andreas>
Component:	ecj	Assignee:	Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	gbenson, overholt
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-10-21 18:34:27 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 Andreas Thienemann 2005-06-16 20:20:43 UTC

During a test rebuild of ecj-3.1-0.M4.9 in the mock builder, the following
problem manifests itself:

+ find -name '*.class' -or -name '*.properties' -or -name '*.rsc'
+ xargs jar cf ../../../ecj-2.1.3.jar
xargs: jar: No such file or directory
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.45084 (%build)

The reason is, that the Required libgcj installs fastjar, but doesn't set up the
correct symlink with the alternatives system.
This is done by the java-$ver-compat package, which is not being installed.

According to nasrat the best way of dealing with this issue is dropping the
BuildRequires for gcc-java and libgcj and just setting a BuildRequire for
java-$ver-compat, or even better the virtual java-devel package which is
provided by the java-compat package. This will fix the alternatives problem and
pull in gcj and libgcj as well.

Comment 1 Thomas Fitzsimmons 2005-10-01 21:29:30 UTC

Gary, have we done this already with the java-gcj-compat virtual provide you
created?

Comment 2 Gary Benson 2005-10-03 09:14:03 UTC

This should have been fixed in eclipse one way or another.

Comment 3 Thomas Fitzsimmons 2005-10-03 14:42:41 UTC

Andrew, can you confirm/deny/close this bug?

Comment 4 Andrew Overholt 2005-10-03 14:46:08 UTC

We currently have this in eclipse.spec:

BuildRequires:  java-gcj-compat-devel >= 1.0.33

Gary, is that correct?

Comment 5 Gary Benson 2005-10-03 14:57:32 UTC

That would do it, but you probably should have:

BuildRequires: java

as well, just in case you ever delete the gcj-specific stuff.

Comment 6 Andrew Overholt 2005-10-03 14:58:39 UTC

Yeah, I have that in the non-gcj_support %if block.

I don't know what to do now.  Shall we close this?

Comment 7 Gary Benson 2005-10-03 15:35:40 UTC

Make the "BuildRequires: java" unconditional and then close the bug?

Comment 8 Andrew Overholt 2005-10-21 18:34:27 UTC

I actually like things the way they are right now.  If anyone feels strongly
about changing it, go ahead and do it.  Closing RAWHIDE.