Bug 229000 - ImageMagick SRPM has 2 missing build reqts
Summary: ImageMagick SRPM has 2 missing build reqts
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ImageMagick   
(Show other bugs)
Version: 4.4
Hardware: All Linux
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Norm Murray
QA Contact:
URL: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=1681
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2007-02-16 13:26 UTC by Johnny Hughes
Modified: 2012-06-20 15:52 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2012-06-20 15:52:51 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Build Log differences with and without the BuildRequires (126.92 KB, text/plain)
2007-02-16 13:26 UTC, Johnny Hughes
no flags Details

Description Johnny Hughes 2007-02-16 13:26:05 UTC
The RHEL 4 ImageMagick SRPM has 2 missing build reqts. This causes the SRPM to
build improperly when using automatic buildroot generating programs like mock
(or plague, which calls mock).

The missing build requirements are:


The difference in the build logs (with and without the 2 BuildRequires) is attached.

(in the diff, < beginning lines are the good build {with requires installed} ...
> beginning lines is the SRPM built as is in plague/mock)


I understand that the RHEL 4 codebase is probably not going to be changed to add
these requirements.  I put this here as much to be a help to RHEL users who are
trying to rebuild this package as to try to get the hidden build requirements fixed.


Comment 1 Johnny Hughes 2007-02-16 13:26:06 UTC
Created attachment 148192 [details]
Build Log differences with and without the BuildRequires

Comment 2 Jiri Pallich 2012-06-20 15:52:51 UTC
Thank you for submitting this issue for consideration in Red Hat Enterprise Linux. The release for which you requested us to review is now End of Life. 
Please See https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/

If you would like Red Hat to re-consider your feature request for an active release, please re-open the request via appropriate support channels and provide additional supporting details about the importance of this issue.

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