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

Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas skrev:
> On Sunday, 7 May 2006 16:30, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> s=F6ndag 07 maj 2006 16:45 skrev Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas:
>>> 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?
>> Hmmm,
>> that's why the dssi is disabled in Rosearden as _no_ package in main i=
s
>> allowed to depend on contrib packages...
>=20
> Well, Rosegarden was already in main years ago. DSSI is in Cooker since=
 only a=20
> few weeks ago. That's why we have troubles compiling it in x86_64.
>=20
>> Now we need to check if the dssi is OK to be moved to main, and if so
>> re-enable dssi support...
>=20
> Or move Rosegarden to contrib, or create another Rosegarden-dssi packag=
e in=20
> contrib with DSSI support (and everything else) enabled.
>=20
>>> Well. At this point, I would like to ask why is it necessary to fullf=
ill
>>> all these details only in x86_64, if the same packages and the same s=
pec
>>> 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 repor=
t)
>> It can be a bug in the autorequires checks that does not pick up corre=
ctly
>> on x86_64...
>=20
> Do you think it's time to open a bug report against... Which package, R=
PM?=20
> Or is there anybody knowing about this issue, and thinking that it is =20
> preferable to provide all the explicit dependencies in x86_64 that aren=
't=20
> required in i586?
>=20

First step done...
a new set of dssi packages are uploaded with your suggested fixes...

Now for the rest...
Have you tried to build Rosegarden with dssi enabled?
Does it work?

If so, I'm going to request dssi move to main, and rebuild Rosegarden...

Those modules can stay in contribs for now...

--
Regards

Thomas