Bug 473084

Is this not a bug in the rpm build process then for allowing a blank provides? On a 64 bit platform it just provides the tail.

$ rpm -q --provides opal
()(64bit)  
g726()(64bit)  
gsm0610()(64bit)  
gsmamrcodec()(64bit)  
h261-vic()(64bit)  
h263-ffmpeg()(64bit)  
ima_adpcm()(64bit)  
libopal.so.3.4.2()(64bit)  
lpc10()(64bit)  
speexcodec()(64bit)  
theora()(64bit)  
vpb()(64bit)  
opal = 3.4.2-1.fc10
opal(x86-64) = 3.4.2-1.fc10

usr/lib/opal-3.4.2/codecs/audio/ilbc_audio_pwplugin.so
has a blank SONAME, which is why the find-requires fails

This seems to be due to a Makefile problem in iLBC:
LDSO            =-shared -Wl,-soname,$(SONAME)

The Makefile.in for a number of the audio codecs all have the same LDSO line in them so surely it would be an issue for all of them then.

[perobinson@neo G726]$ !gr
grep LDSO *
Makefile.in:LDSO		=@LDSO@
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) $@ -o $@ $^ $(EXTRALIBS)
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) -o $@ $^ $(EXTRALIBS)
[perobinson@neo G726]$ cd ../GSM0610/
[perobinson@neo GSM0610]$ !gr
grep LDSO *
Makefile.in:LDSO	 	=@LDSO@
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) $@ -o $@ $^ $(EXTRALIBS)
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) -o $@ $^ $(EXTRALIBS)
[perobinson@neo GSM0610]$ cd ../iLBC/
[perobinson@neo iLBC]$ !g
grep LDSO *
Makefile.in:LDSO	 	=@LDSO@
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) $@ -o $@ $^
Makefile.in:	$(CC) $(LDSO) -o $@ $^
[perobinson@neo iLBC]$

BTW is there a command line equivalent of find-requires?

(In reply to comment #3)
> The Makefile.in for a number of the audio codecs all have the same LDSO line in
> them so surely it would be an issue for all of them then.

Sorry, I meant that that particular codec doesn't define SONAME.

And this in turn causes make to write an .so with a blank SONAME

This has been reported upstream but I'm yet to get a response.

I have a fix for this and it will be in the next opal release that will be pushed out shortly along with other fixes.

ekiga-3.0.2-2.fc10, opal-3.4.4-4.fc10, ptlib-2.4.4-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update ekiga opal ptlib'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-1363

Well, it's not empty but it seems to have duplicate Provides now ? (lpc10)

  <rpmTag name="Providename">
        <string>g726</string>
        <string>gsm0610</string>
        <string>gsmamrcodec</string>
        <string>h261-vic</string>
        <string>h263-ffmpeg</string>
        <string>iLBC</string>
        <string>ima_adpcm</string>
        <string>libopal.so.3.4-beta4</string>
        <string>lpc10</string>
        <string>lpc10</string>
        <string>speexcodec</string>
        <string>theora</string>
        <string>vpb</string>
        <string>opal</string>
        <string>opal(x86-32)</string>
  </rpmTag>

Hmm. I don't see that here 

[root@neo ~]# rpm -q --provides opal | sort
g726()(64bit)  
gsm0610()(64bit)  
gsmamrcodec()(64bit)  
h261-vic()(64bit)  
h263-ffmpeg()(64bit)  
iLBC()(64bit)  
ima_adpcm()(64bit)  
libopal.so.3.4-beta4()(64bit)  
lpc10()(64bit)  
opal = 3.4.4-2.fc10
opal(x86-64) = 3.4.4-2.fc10
speexcodec()(64bit)  
theora()(64bit)  
vpb()(64bit)  

And the fix was put into ilbc not lpc. How did you generate the above list?

rpm -qp --xml opal-3.4.4-4.fc10.i386.rpm
i.e. the same way as the original report

But maybe it was just false alarm then.

Fixed in F-10 in opal-3.4.4-4.fc10