Hi Christina,
No, this was the right list. Unfortunately, we don't control the fedora
packaging (I didn't even know they were creating a separate package). They
should include all include files if they are going to include any simply
because I don't think they figure out the dependencies. At least that
would be my take.
Andy
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, Steve Traylen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Cristina Aiftimiei
<caifti(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I apologies if it's the wrong place for making such questions. Please let
> me know if I have to contact somone else or in a different matter.
>
>
Hi Christina,
Best is to submit a bug to redhat's bugzilla, you can take a short cut to
correct page using the link on this page:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/xrootd
I'm fairly sure you have to register with Redhat's bugzilla once there.
> Our project is starting to make intensive use of EPEL packages, so our
> developers are trying to adapt their software to what is provided in the
> EPEL repository.
>
Good.
> In the last days one of our groups need the:
>
> - XrdCms/XrdCmsReq.hh.
> - XrdCms/XrdCmsXmiReq.hh
>
> That said the files are here:
/usr/include/xrootd/XrdCms/XrdCmsReq.hh
but this may still be a bug of course due to your comment below.
> file and those files are not provided by the xrootd-devel package (
>
xrootd-devel-3.0.0-1.el5)<http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5...;,
> as expected by the developers.
> More than this the xrootd-devl il providing the XrdCms/XrdCmsXmi.hh that
> contains:
> #include "XrdCms/XrdCmsReq.hh"
>
> that means including a file that doesn't exist, or at least I'm seeing it
> like this, sorry if I'm wrong.
>
> Is there a reason that those headers are missing from the xrootd-devl, and
> is there a way to include them?
>
> Thank you very much,
> Cristina
>
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
>
>
--
Steve Traylen