[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#350066: marked as done (Tellico FTBS, libkcal.la references libXft.la which does not exist anymore)



Your message dated Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:39:49 -0800
with message-id <20060128233949.GB10198@tennyson.dodds.net>
and subject line Bug#350066: Tellico FTBS, libkcal.la references libXft.la which does not exist anymore
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jan 2006 01:14:17 +0000
>From regis@boudin.name Thu Jan 26 17:14:17 2006
Return-path: <regis@boudin.name>
Received: from smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net ([212.135.6.10])
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1F2IBt-0004gU-K5
	for submit@bugs.debian.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:14:17 -0800
Received: from bb-87-80-240-114.ukonline.co.uk ([87.80.240.114] helo=[192.168.1.100])
	by smarthost0.mail.uk.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10)
	id 1F2IBr-000AY6-00; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:14:15 +0000
Subject: Tellico FTBS, libkcal.la references libXft.la which does not exist
	anymore
From: Regis Boudin <regis@boudin.name>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Cc: xft@packages.debian.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:14:14 +0000
Message-Id: <1138324454.12531.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: kdepim
Version: 3.5.0-5
Severity: grave

Hi,

Trying to build a snapshot of tellico, it FTBS because of a
missing /usr/lib/libXft.la file. I tried to rebuild the latest version
of tellico with pbuilder, which also failed with the same error.

All the .la files from the kdepim dev packages
reference /usr/lib/libXft.la, if the build was done with libxft-dev <<
2.1.8. However, the file was removed last week with xft 2.1.8.2-1,
making the packages linking against any of the kdepim libs FTBFS, hence
the grave severity.
i386 if affected, but some arches are not, such as i64.

I tried rebuilding kdepim and installing the generated packages, and I
could successfully build tellico.

I am not sure if the solution is to rebuild kdepim with the new xft, or
include libXft.la back, so I CC the xft maintainer, but something needs
to be done.


Regis
-- 
"While a monkey can be a manager, it takes a human to be an engineer"
                        Erik Zapletal


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 350066-done) by bugs.debian.org; 28 Jan 2006 23:39:52 +0000
>From vorlon@debian.org Sat Jan 28 15:39:52 2006
Return-path: <vorlon@debian.org>
Received: from dsl093-039-086.pdx1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.39.86] helo=tennyson.dodds.net)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1F2zfc-0007AY-7G
	for 350066-done@bugs.debian.org; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:39:52 -0800
Received: by tennyson.dodds.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 4D2122C001; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:39:49 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:39:49 -0800
From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
To: David Nusinow <david_nusinow@verizon.net>
Cc: Regis Boudin <regis@boudin.name>, 350066-done@bugs.debian.org,
	xft@packages.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#350066: Tellico FTBS, libkcal.la references libXft.la which does not exist anymore
Message-ID: <20060128233949.GB10198@tennyson.dodds.net>
References: <1138324454.12531.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060127063431.GB7218@tennyson.dodds.net> <20060127234645.GA7380@localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7ZAtKRhVyVSsbBD2"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060127234645.GA7380@localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02


--7ZAtKRhVyVSsbBD2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 06:46:44PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:34:31PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > I am not sure if the solution is to rebuild kdepim with the new xft, =
or
> > > include libXft.la back, so I CC the xft maintainer, but something nee=
ds
> > > to be done.

> > Given that xft also supports pkg-config, AFAICT there's no specific rea=
son
> > that libxft-dev should need to include libXft.la anymore.  The important
> > thing is to know whether or not it's coming back, or whether we should
> > requeue kdepim for rebuilding.

> If it's as simple as a rebuild, then just requeue kdepim for rebuilding.
> >From what I understand, the .pc files are superior to .la files, although
> if I'm wrong someone should feel free to correct me.

Rebuilds queued; closing the bug.

Thanks,
--=20
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

--7ZAtKRhVyVSsbBD2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD3ADFKN6ufymYLloRAkQoAKCUdElRA4RODt2Etfe9pPNtM51RxQCgjlCF
eB1Y9RNhAt7avrpaWYzGOc0=
=dRZF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--7ZAtKRhVyVSsbBD2--



Reply to: