Re: Re: [REBUILD] dssi-0.9.1-3mdk.src.rpm from cooker does not build correctly on x86_64

On Sunday, 7 May 2006 14:40, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
> > Anybody wanting to use the dssi.h header to develop (or compile) a 
> > plug-in needs to have installed the ladspa.h header in order to be able
> > to do it. It seems sensible to reflect this dependency in the RPM
> > package.
[..]
> Of course if most of foo-devel users anyway needs to install bar-devel,
> then the Requires could be ok...

_Every_ user of dssi-devel _must_ install also ladspa-devel. There is a  
#include <ladspa.h> inside the file dssi.h; it has also an #include  
<alsa/seq_event.h> so I guess there should be another requirement: 

%package devel
Requires: ladspa-devel
Requires: libalsa2-devel

I want to remark that the only piece of software in the dssi-devel package is 
this single header. Likewise, the single ladspa.h file is the only software 
component of ladspa-devel. There are also documents, of course.

> > It is a common
> > question after the demo, that my friends ask me if I can recommend
> > Mandriva as a platform for Rosegarden. I must answer *not*, because
> > Mandriva doesn't include neither DSSI nor plugins, and provides a
> > Rosegarden binary package compiled without DSSI support. I would like to
> > help to fill the gap.
>
> If they are GPL /Open-Source all those, if so please do help us help you...

Yes. The DSSI header file is provided under the GNU Lesser General Public 
License, see http://dssi.sourceforge.net; the examples are public domain, and 
the jack-dssi-host is provided under a BSD-like license.

http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/contrib-SPECS/dssi/

Plugins can have other licenses, of course, but the three plugins that are now 
in Cooker (rebuild pending) are GPL licensed:

http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/contrib-SPECS/fluidsynth-dssi/
http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/contrib-SPECS/xsynth-dssi/
http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/contrib-SPECS/hexter/

After the whole set of packages are in contrib, there will be another problem: 
Rosegarden is in main, while the dssi package is in contrib... what can we do 
then?

> But here it comes again, if we provide all those modules as binary rpms,
> then I think that the -devel Requires should instead be added as
> BuildRequires for those modules...

The three plug-in specs have already a BuildRequires: dssi-devel. You may want 
to patch these specs to include also the ladspa-devel requirement or 
otherwise include the Requires: ladspa-devel in the dssi-devel package, which 
is my proposal.

Well. At this point, I would like to ask why is it necessary to fullfill all 
these details only in x86_64, if the same packages and the same spec files  
are building OK in i586:
http://qa.mandriva.com/build/iurt/cooker/i586/log/status.contrib.log
(look for dssi, fluidsynth-dssi, xsynth-dssi and hexter in this report)

Regards,
Pedro