Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 188156
fixps broken - tries to re-create directory
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:29 EST
Description of problem:
On my fc5 system, if I try to run a2ps with a postscript file, it will fail with
a "mkdir: cannot create directory blah". I traced it down in fixps which is a
This is the problem:
On line 41: tmpdir=$(mktemp -d /tmp/$program.XXXXXX)
On line 194: mkdir $tmpdir
This will fail because mktemp already created the directory.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
/usr/bin/fixps -q /tmp/y.ps
mkdir: cannot create directory `/tmp/fixps.k18151': File exists
Simple solution would be to change line 194 to mkdir -p
Confirmed. Why not just remove that mkdir call though? Seems to be superfluous
given the behaviour of mktemp.
Sure, I guess I was looking for the safest fix. Removing that line should be
Strangely it is fixed in cvs, but not published in the
Problems building it.. :-(
I think that the attached patch allows to rebuild.
However I think it would be much simpler if the autotools weren't
run. From a look at the patches, I can't see why it should be needed?
Couldn't calling external libtool be sufficient? Or did I miss
Created attachment 136533 [details]
patch to use AC_ variants instead of AM_ for newer autoconf
Thanks! Possibly it isn't needed any more, but at this stage we're really
trying to stick to minimal changes..
I think it has never been needed, and it is more a little
packaging mistake (although I cannot say for sure).
I have spotted many issues in the a2ps package, it is not
up-to-date with regard with the packaging guidelines and
best practices -- like many packages in core. I have allready
(and completly independently) filled a bug for the split of
a -devel package, but I think filling many bugs for packaging
issues is a lost of time. In my opinion to have more feedback and
avoid time lost in following those many little packaging bugs it
would be more practical and less time consuming if you just
started a FC review bug, to help solving all the issues globally.
Of course this is also a time consuming process, but unlike
a classical review it is allready in core so you'll have all your
time to fix things.
This is for the devel branch only of course, for FC6 it is indeed
better to keep things as they are.