Bug 120760 - Glide3 required by i386 package but not x86_64 package
Summary: Glide3 required by i386 package but not x86_64 package
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: xorg-x11   
(Show other bugs)
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64 Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mike A. Harris
QA Contact: David Lawrence
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2004-04-13 19:24 UTC by Gene Czarcinski
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:10 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-04-13 20:24:07 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Gene Czarcinski 2004-04-13 19:24:29 UTC
Description of problem:

Package xorg-x11-0.6.6-0.2004_03_30.5 for i386 requires Glide3 >=
20010520 but the x86_64 version of the same package does not. 
However, Glide3 is built for the x86_64 platform.

Comment 1 Mike A. Harris 2004-04-13 19:52:17 UTC
The Glide3 package contains "ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} alpha" and
has done so for quite a long time now.  I just checked our buildsystem,
and there is no record of any x86_64 Glide3 packages having ever
been compiled.  Here is the current head of the tree:

total 20
drwxrwsr-x    5 buildsys buildsys     4096 Mar 31 12:01 ./
drwxrwsr-x    3 buildsys buildsys     4096 Mar 31 12:01 ../
drwxrwsr-x    2 buildsys buildsys     4096 Mar 31 12:01 SRPMS/
drwxrwsr-x    2 buildsys buildsys     4096 Mar 31 12:01 i386/
drwxrwsr-x    4 buildsys buildsys     4096 Mar 31 12:01 tests/

My guess, is that you have the 32bit Glide3 for x86 installed on
your AMD64 system.  That most likely will not work under a 64bit
kernel though, as 32<->64bit thunking is not available for DRI
currently, and we don't support Glide3 on AMD64 anyway.

Just for fun though, if you're interested in testing it out, comment
out the Exclusivearch line in the Glide3 spec file and recompile
it on AMD64 as 64bit, and give it a whirl on the tdfx driver to see
if it even works or not.  We've never built it nor tried it on AMD64,
so I'm unsure if it will work or not, but it'd be interesting to
find out at least.  ;o)   I think the X server might hard code
the path to Glide to dlopen() the module.

As an aside note, the BuildRequires on Glide3-devel is no longer
needed, due to dlopen() being used now, so I'll probably kill the
Glide3-devel subpackage sometime down the road too.

Closing as 'NOTABUG' for now, but if you try rebuilding Glide3
as per above, I'm interested in hearing your results via email

Thanks Gene,

Comment 2 Gene Czarcinski 2004-04-13 20:14:14 UTC
Mike, I am going to open this again but change it to distribution and
x86_64.  The packages are i386 but are part of the x86_64 set and you
indicate that they should not work.

Comment 3 Justin M. Forbes 2004-04-13 20:23:12 UTC
I think the issue is, they will not work, but they are a requirement
of a requirement, etc... Openoffice.org is what requires the xorg
32bit pieces. xorg is what requires the glide.  So we end up with one
useless package to allow for a somewhat usefull package to allow for a
usefull package :)

Comment 4 Bill Nottingham 2004-04-13 20:24:07 UTC
Fixed in comps, they should no longer end up in the tree.

Comment 5 Mike A. Harris 2004-04-13 20:40:12 UTC
Justin)  The master 'xorg-x11' package has a hard coded
"Requires: Glide3" to ensure that if the 32bit X server package
is installed, that the 32bit Glide3 package is also installed for
x86 installations.

IMHO, the 32bit "xorg-x11" package should not ship on AMD64 at all,
as we do not want a 32bit X server installed on a 64bit OS.  The
64bit package should be installed.  If the 64bit "xorg-x11" package
is installed, it should not "Requires: Glide3", as it is ifarched.

Does this make sense?

Comment 6 Bill Nottingham 2004-04-13 20:44:21 UTC
The 32-bit xorg-x11 package does not, to the best of my knowledge,
ship on x86-64.

Where it was getting pulled in was via Glide3-devel in the development
libs section of comps.

Comment 7 Justin M. Forbes 2004-04-13 20:55:24 UTC
That might explain it.  Open Office requires xorg-x11-libs, but I do
not think that xorg-x11-libs requires xorg-x11 proper.

Mike) From what you said completely makes sense, except that we have
hit a limitation of rpm it seems. In the case where 32bit requires
include things which will not run on 64bit systems, requires cannot be
ifinstallarched (ie 
ifarch i386 installed on %{ix86} require foo, bar
ifarch i386 installed on x86_64, PPC64 require bar)

The only option in such a scenario is to break out the required libs
into a seperate RPM.

Comment 8 Gene Czarcinski 2004-04-13 22:01:16 UTC
That is strange.  I updated all of the xorg-x11-* packages (both
x86_64 and i386) on my x86_64 system with up2date and there was no
complaining about Glide3 being missing ... I also upgraded all the
openoffice.org packages ... updated to development/rawhide current as
of today (13 Apr).

The first time I ran across Glide3 is when I went to do the same
upgrading on a dual processor P-III.

I believe that Glide3 can be removed.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.