Bug 206713 - graphviz requires X-libraries
Summary: graphviz requires X-libraries
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: graphviz   
(Show other bugs)
Version: 5
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jima
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: FE7Target
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2006-09-15 20:38 UTC by Roy-Magne Mo
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2007-02-14 13:40:44 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 Roy-Magne Mo 2006-09-15 20:38:43 UTC
Description of problem:
As of graphviz-2.8-4.fc5, graphviz started depending on X-libraries. I can see
nothing in the changelog indicating any change. If there is dependencies on X,
can this be split into its own subpackage?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:

Comment 1 Alex Lancaster 2006-09-16 08:48:06 UTC
graphviz-2.8-3.fc5 (previous version) didn't depend on the X libraries because
the previous version's package was broken.  It was erroneously missing the
/usr/bin/lefty binary, which is built against X:

$ ldd /usr/bin/lefty
        linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
        libXaw.so.7 => /usr/lib/libXaw.so.7 (0x0016a000)
        libSM.so.6 => /usr/lib/libSM.so.6 (0x00b41000)
        libICE.so.6 => /usr/lib/libICE.so.6 (0x00a94000)
        libXpm.so.4 => /usr/lib/libXpm.so.4 (0x00b27000)
        libXt.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXt.so.6 (0x0041b000)
        libXmu.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXmu.so.6 (0x00ab0000)
        libXext.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x00d14000)
        libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x00971000)
        libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb7f59000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb7e26000)
        libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXau.so.6 (0x00d0f000)
        libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x00d07000)
        libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb7e21000)
        /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7fa5000)

Without this binary, however, many of the programs in graphviz (dotty, lneato)
etc. are non-functional.

The non-graphical versions of these programs (dot, neato) which were included in
the broken package don't rely on X and so it didn't pull in X as a requirement.  

I suppose the graphical programs such as dotty, lneato and lefty could be split
out into a subpackage, but upstream doesn't do it that way and graphviz is
inherently a package for generating graphs that are supposed to viewed.

Comment 2 Roy-Magne Mo 2006-09-16 14:19:26 UTC
I just reported it partly as a question, since it was a dependency for an
another package - I'm not using it myself. But generally, if there is parts of
the graphviz package that has a use without the X-libraries, the X-dependant
files should be packaged for itself - for use on servers and such.

Comment 3 Jima 2006-10-03 16:37:59 UTC
Taking ownership of this bug, as it's my package now.

I'm somewhat stalling, waiting for Graphviz 2.10; if it doesn't show up soon I
guess I'll be giving the package an overhaul, to see if there are
non-X-dependent components to leave in the main package while splitting off the
X-dependent bits to a subpackage (along with the dependencies).

Comment 4 Jima 2006-10-04 21:30:35 UTC
Alex, Roy-Magne: After some looking, it appears that the only thing in the
package that pulls in the X dependencies is (as Alex hinted) lefty.  The
remaining significant dependencies are:


My question (as a graphviz non-user) is, how useful is the package without
lefty?  Is it worth splitting lefty off to its own subpackage?  If so, any
suggestions on what to call it?  graphviz-gui?

I was just looking at the package again today because I need to rebuild it (for
other reasons).  I think I'll push this build as-is, and make the changes
if/when I get a good answer to this.


Comment 5 Jima 2007-02-14 13:40:44 UTC
The lack of response makes me suspect this isn't particularly critical.  Closing

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