Bug 25052
Summary: | cdrdao does not build xcdrdao | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Powertools | Reporter: | Need Real Name <jpatter> |
Component: | cdrdao | Assignee: | Tim Powers <timp> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 7.0 | ||
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: | 2001-01-27 02:28:38 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
Need Real Name
2001-01-26 22:56:26 UTC
If this is for the version shipped in 5.1, we didn't support it at the time the problem was discovered (your report lists the bug as for 5.1). We did release a package for Red Hat Powertools which no longer requires gtk-- or gtkmm, as it doesn't build the binary for X, and it doesn't include a desktop file. You may or may not be able to build it on 5.1, I can't guarantee anything. The errata announcement for this is at http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/powertools/RHBA-2000-068-02.html Sorry, that should have been 7.0. Actually, the version that I was working with was from Rawhide, but there didn't seem to be a cdrdao option under Rawhide (no powertools), or a Rawhide option under powertools.... I downloaded the most recent version available from the rawhide site, and tried to build on Redhat 7. (I had the gtkmm packages from rawhide as well.) The configure script is unable to detect the fact that gtkmm is available and therfore will not build xcdrdao. Am I to understand from the above errata that when next updated, the rawhide packages will also not require gtkmm, and that there is currently no expectation of supporting xcdrdao in a rpm? Additionally, I was unable to view bug 17318 (Insufficient permissions). Can you summarize, or make that available? In summary of the bug that wasn't marked public, it was basically concerning the problem with the package requiring gtk--, and not gtkmm. The change in names for gtkmm didn't get picked up in that package. Your first question about whether or not we will be shipping xcdrdao is correct in the assumption that xcdrdao won't be in the next package we ship. I'm not holding out hope on xccdrdao though. Hopefully in the future it won't require gtkmm (which is horribly broken ATM) and use inti instead. I can't recall off the top of my head when inti will be merged into GNOME officially though. Also, I should have resolved this with errata instead of won'tfix, for some reason I didn't notice I did that before. Tim |