Bug 673

Summary:	com_err.h in wrong directory or com_err man page wrong
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	bam
Component:	e2fsprogs	Assignee:	Florian La Roche <laroche>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.2
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:	1999-01-14 20:35:30 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description bam 1999-01-03 05:12:42 UTC

The com_err man page declares #include <com_err.h> yet after
an install this file is placed in /usr/include/et/com_err.h.

As a result many files in the cyrus distrib. fail to
compile (they reference it as the man page suggests).

In a related item: the /usr/bin/compile_et script has a
wrong directory assigned to ET_DIR causing this script to
fail.  The correct setting should be ET_DIR=/usr/share/et.

Comment 1 David Lawrence 1999-01-04 20:31:59 UTC

I have verified that these are true as reported. The script does fail
complaining about not being able to find its template files which are
located in /usr/share/et.

Comment 2 Jeff Johnson 1999-01-14 20:35:59 UTC

Fixed in dist-6.0 e2fsprogs-1.13-3

------- Additional Comments From   10/22/99 22:46 -------
This was fixed in e2fsprogs 1.14, but because you guys fixed the bug
by hacking the spec file to post-process the installed file, I didn't
notice the fix.   This was a really ugly way to fix things guys....
why didn't you use the RPM patch file facility.  I do scan the redhat
RPM looking for patches you may have applied, but I don't necessarily
go looking for gross kludges located in the spec file.  This is a
problem since the kludge is still in the spec file in
e2fsprogs-1.15-3, even though the shell script bug was long fixed.
Lucky for you I noticed this while I was preparing my 1.16 release, so
I noticed the man page problem.   But I must say I'm pretty
disappointed....

						- Ted