Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 160186
gnomesowrd - Fails to build on x86_64
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:07 EST
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050524 Fedora/1.0.4-4 Firefox/1.0.4 Description of problem: gnomesword fails to build on x86_64 for fc4/development In file included from ../../src/main/sword.h:29, from display.cc:53: /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gi18n.h:25:1: warning: "_" redefined In file included from /usr/include/libgnome-2.0/libgnome/gnome-i18n.h:40, from /usr/include/libgnome-2.0/libgnome/libgnome.h:30, from /usr/include/libgnomeui-2.0/gnome.h:5, from ../../src/gui/utilities.h:26, from ../../src/main/display.hh:31, from display.cc:49: /usr/include/libbonobo-2.0/bonobo/bonobo-i18n.h:69:1: warning: this is the locat ion of the previous definition /usr/include/libintl.h:40: error: expected unqualified-id before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:40: error: expected `)' before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:40: error: expected initializer before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:45: error: expected unqualified-id before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:45: error: expected `)' before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:45: error: expected initializer before 'const' /usr/include/libintl.h:52: error: expected unqualified-id before 'const' (etc.) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Try to build on x86_64 2. 3. Actual Results: build fails Expected Results: build succeeds Additional info:
Oh my. This looks like a problem with either Core -devel packages or gnomesword including too many headers.
I've been seeing this on several distros for at least a year. I can't believe it's not more widely reported/solved.
I have a src.rpm that *might* fix the problem. I don't have an x86_64 machine to test the build on myself. The new src.rpm is here: http://mpeters.us/fc_extras/gnomesword-2.1.2-2.2.fc4.src.rpm I would appreciate it if someone could test the src.rpm (preferably building with mock, but not required) and let me know if the build works or not. If it works, I'll commit the patch to cvs and request a build.
That src.rpm above didn't do it - but a minor change to it did. Through build system, release pending.