Bug 448347
| Summary: | FIle conflict of /usr/bin/ebb with dvipdfmx | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
| Component: | dvipdfm | Assignee: | Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | jnovy, pertusus |
| 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: | 2008-07-21 16:51:22 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: | |||
Ah, yes, thanks for the report. I'll compare the two ebb programs and see if there's any differences. This is the problem with packaging two forked codebases, alas. [Aside: at some point I think we should drop dvipdfm, but I'm not sure that now is the right time.] Ok, have added a patch to the dvipdfmx package which renames ebb to ebbx. This is included in package 0-0.23.20080520cvs http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=628805 I contacted the upstream dvipdfmx maintainer about this, and the following is his reply: Thanks for your report. Actually there were two bounding box extraction utilities, ebb and xbb. As you might know, ebb is quite old and it is not useful in these days because it does not support pdf files with version 1.4 or higher. Moreover, the bounding box calculated by ebb from JPEG or PNG makes different size figures as compared to the result by pdfTeX. So we made a new bounding box extraction program xbb. Recently, Karl Berry, the maintainer of TeXLive suggested to combine those programs into dvipdfmx. He wanted just one executable, and the name of the new extraction utility became "extractbb". It behaves as xbb and with "-m" option, it behaves as ebb (but more powerful). Anyway, as I guess, Karl wanted to remove the original (buggy) ebb from TeXLive. So there may be no problem with TeXLive. Moreover, I do not want the name "ebbx". If you want to remain the original "ebb". Just do not make the link, because if someone wants a new ebb, he can use "extractbb -m" instead. |
Description of problem: [root@localhost i386]# rpm -q dvipdfm dvipdfmx dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc9.i386 dvipdfmx-0-0.20.20071115cvs.fc9.i386 [root@localhost i386]# rpm -qf /usr/bin/ebb dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc9.i386 [root@localhost i386]# ls -al dvipdfm*rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 304871 May 11 09:43 dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc9.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 304875 May 11 09:38 dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc10.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 398303 Mar 8 08:45 dvipdfmx-0-0.20.20071115cvs.fc9.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 381134 May 26 15:09 dvipdfmx-0-0.22.20080520cvs.fc10.i386.rpm [root@localhost i386]# rpm -Fvh --test dvipdfm*rpm Preparing... ########################################### [100%] file /usr/bin/ebb conflicts between attempted installs of dvipdfmx-0-0.22.20080520cvs.fc10.i386 and dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc10.i386 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): dvipdfm-0.13.2d-38.fc10 dvipdfmx-0-0.22.20080520cvs.fc10 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. See above 2. 3.