Re: [WBEL-devel] Re: [WBEL-users] Respin 2?
bishop <[email protected]> Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:07:49 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.whitebox.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
John, No go. The only difference between -3 and -3.1 is a %release bump (to invoke a new build) and the comment you mention: > --- RPM-libao-0.8.3-3/SPECS/libao.spec 2003-01-22 13:42:53.000000000 -0800 > +++ RPM-libao-0.8.3-3.1/SPECS/libao.spec 2004-10-13 15:14:42.000000000 -0700 > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > Summary: Cross Platform Audio Output Library. > Name: libao > Version: 0.8.3 > -Release: 3 > +Release: 3.1 > Group: System Environment/Libraries > Copyright: GPL > URL: http://www.xiph.org/ > @@ -62,6 +62,9 @@ > %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig > > %changelog > +* Wed Oct 13 2003 Colin Walters <[email protected]> 0.8.3-3.1 > +- Rebuilt to fix multilib conflict (135636) > + > * Wed Jan 22 2003 Tim Powers <[email protected]> > - rebuilt > It's something else that was altered, and upon which this depended, that was changed. yay! I ran a comparison of 085-2 and 083-3 and there were more minor differences, but not a bunch. 085-2 won't build either? - bish John Morris wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Bob Ramstad wrote: > > >>Any thoughts on Respin 2? > > > Yup, now that the holidays and all of the roadtrips are over with, that is > #3 on the list. > > #2 is getting the last of the U4 packages built. Most are simple enough > jobs of moving the WB patch forward but libao is crapping out on the build > process. This one looks to be interesting, it is crapping out linking up > the esd plugin. The generic spec file is adding --enable-static to the > configure step while RH is omitting it from theirs. Oddly enough the > tarball seems to build without it when built manually but fails WITH that > switch. The last entry in the changelog is this little tidbit, which > seems like it might be related: > > * Wed Oct 13 2003 Colin Walters <[email protected]> 0.8.3-3.1 > - Rebuilt to fix multilib conflict (135636) > > But since bug 135636 is a bug mere mortals are not permitted to view in > the RH bugzilla, looks like I get to go fish. Going to poke around with > it because it has to get rebuilt, but if this bug is shallow to one of the > other pairs of eyes out on the list (cc'ing to -devel to increase those > eyeballs) that would be great. :) Guess the first step is to grab the > previous version and make a detailed comparison. > First though, #1 is getting the website updated with the new mirrors. > -- For I am not so enamored of my own opinions that I disregard what others may think of them. -- Nicolaus Copernicus