Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
First Last Prev Next    This bug is not in your last search results.
Bug 101829 - gimp-print does not build
gimp-print does not build
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 101858
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: gimp-print (Show other bugs)
3.0
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Tim Waugh
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree / graph
 
Reported: 2003-08-07 09:44 EDT by Michael Redinger
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:06 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-02-21 13:58:00 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

  None (edit)
Description Michael Redinger 2003-08-07 09:44:29 EDT 
The Taroon gimp-print-4.2.4-5.src.rpm package does not build correctly
on Taroon (everything install) because there are failed dependencies:

error: Failed build dependencies:
        ghostscript-devel is needed by gimp-print-4.2.4-5
        gimp-devel is needed by gimp-print-4.2.4-5

ghostscript-devel is not included in Taroon (but ghostscript is)
gimp and gimp-devel are not included in Taroon

See also bug #101828
Comment 1 Tim Waugh 2003-08-07 09:48:17 EDT 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 101828 ***
Comment 2 Michael Redinger 2003-08-07 09:52:59 EDT 
Hm, this is not really a duplicate of bug #101828 - note the missing "gimp-devel" 
in this report (as opposed to "gimp-print-devel" 101828).
Reopening it. Feel free to close it again. ;-)
Comment 3 Tim Waugh 2003-08-07 09:55:23 EDT 
Oops, sorry.
Comment 4 Michael Redinger 2003-08-07 09:57:53 EDT 
Forgot one thing:
I suppose I will find some similar bugs (missing build prereqs).
Should I file them against "distribution" or should I use the appropriate
package (and leave it to the maintainer to reassign the bug if needed)?
Comment 5 Bill Nottingham 2003-08-07 16:04:42 EDT 
File them against the package, so we can weed out incorrect/missing
buildprereqs, or incorrectly omitted -devel packages. Once those are verified as
being correct, we can then close the bug appropriately.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 101858 ***
Comment 6 Red Hat Bugzilla 2006-02-21 13:58:00 EST 
Changed to 'CLOSED' state since 'RESOLVED' has been deprecated.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
First Last Prev Next    This bug is not in your last search results.