[Bug 539698] New: debuginfo package conflict between binutils and mingw32-binutils
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: debuginfo package conflict between binutils and mingw32-binutils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539698
Summary: debuginfo package conflict between binutils and
mingw32-binutils
Product: Fedora
Version: 12
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: low
Priority: low
Component: mingw32-binutils
AssignedTo: rjones(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: jarin.franek(a)post.cz
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: berrange(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com,
fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
Trying to install both binutils debuginfo and mingw32-binutils debuginfo
packages (In fact, I did install debuginfo for the whole distribution). The
transaction check fails with a conflict.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
mingw32-binutils-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64
binutils-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
How reproducible:
see the steps:
Steps to Reproduce:
1. debuginfo-install binutils
2. debuginfo-install mingw32-binutils
Actual results:
----------------------------------------snippet
Finished Transaction Test
Transaction Check Error:
file /usr/src/debug/binutils-2.19.51.0.14/bfd/elf.c from install of
mingw32-binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
file /usr/src/debug/binutils-2.19.51.0.14/bfd/elfcode.h from install of
mingw32-binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
file /usr/src/debug/binutils-2.19.51.0.14/bfd/section.c from install of
mingw32-binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
file /usr/src/debug/binutils-2.19.51.0.14/gas/dw2gencfi.c from install of
mingw32-binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
file /usr/src/debug/binutils-2.19.51.0.14/ld/ldmain.c from install of
mingw32-binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package binutils-debuginfo-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.x86_64
Error Summary
-------------
----------------------------------------snippet
Expected results:
No conflict.
Since both binutils and mingw32-binutils install in-parallel without problems,
I would expect their debuginfo packages to install in-parallel as well.
Additional info:
May concern other mingw32-* packages as well.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 3 months
[Bug 595006] New: mingw32-dlfcn-static libdl.a has no index
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: mingw32-dlfcn-static libdl.a has no index
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=595006
Summary: mingw32-dlfcn-static libdl.a has no index
Product: Fedora
Version: 12
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: mingw32-dlfcn
AssignedTo: rjones(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: stebbins(a)jetheaddev.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org, berrange(a)redhat.com,
rjones(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl,
fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
When attempting to link with libdl.a this error occurs:
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libdl.a: could not read symbols:
Archive has no index; run ranlib to add one
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Release : 0.7.r11.fc12
Steps to Reproduce:
1. gcc -static somefile.c -o some.exe -ldl
Additional info:
running ranlib fixes the problem:
# i686-pc-mingw32-ranlib libdl.a
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 3 months
[Bug 628199] New: mingw32: libintl-8.dll instead of libintl.dll
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: mingw32: libintl-8.dll instead of libintl.dll
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=628199
Summary: mingw32: libintl-8.dll instead of libintl.dll
Product: Fedora
Version: 13
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: mingw32-gettext
AssignedTo: rjones(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: felipe.contreras(a)gmail.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org, rjones(a)redhat.com,
erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl,
fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Most GTK+ distributions in win32 use libintl.dll, so libraries compiled in
Fedora don't work there.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 4 months
[Bug 508746] New: noarch MinGW debuginfo packages don't get placed in the debuginfo repository
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: noarch MinGW debuginfo packages don't get placed in the debuginfo repository
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508746
Summary: noarch MinGW debuginfo packages don't get placed in
the debuginfo repository
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: mash
AssignedTo: notting(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: notting(a)redhat.com, jkeating(a)redhat.com,
fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
This bug was originally reported at the rel-eng trac (
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1949 ), but I was asked to report this
here:
A few days ago we (the Fedora MinGW SIG) started experimenting with generating
-debuginfo subpackages for our libraries. For this we've created some custom
scripts to strip out debug information to separate files and added some RPM
macro's to create -debuginfo subpackages containing these files. This has been
discussed at
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-June/001748.html
The RPM scripts were added in mingw32-filesystem-52-1.fc12 and some of our
regular MinGW packages were rebuild as can be seen at
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=111400
After waiting for the next rawhide push we discovered that the
mingw32-glib2-debuginfo subpackage wasn't published in the rawhide-debuginfo
repository. We think it's caused by the fact that our mingw32 packages are
noarch.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 5 months
Making a library MinGW compatible, general MinGW questions
by Christopher Thielen
Hi fedora-mingw,
I'm one of the developers on an open source game currently compiling on
Linux, OS X and Windows. I'd like to set up Fedora cross-compile for the
Windows binary; under MSYS/MinGW on Windows, all needed libraries and
the game itself compile, so I'm hopeful it will be possible to do this
without leaving Fedora.
I have a number of distinct problems in accomplishing this, mostly due
to my lack of education with MinGW, so I'm hoping this is the correct
list to seek help. I think it would be best if I start with some of the
earliest issues I encountered in my build process, as they may affect or
resolve later questions.
First, our software requires: libxml2, SDL, SDL_image, SDL_mixer and
FTGL. SDL and libxml2 already have MinGW packages on Fedora and they
worked very well. SDL_image and SDL_mixer did not but they compiled fine
simply using mingw-configure, make, make install. Be that as it is, is
there much else involved in package management for this sort of
software? If not, I'd be interested in volunteering to maintain Fedora
MinGW packages for SDL_image and SDL_mixer if they're not already on the
way.
My first real spot of trouble came with FTGL, which uses the GNU
autotools but seems to have some compatibility issues with MinGW. I
understand this is a bug in FTGL, but I was hoping for advice on fixing
this.
Their configure script fails to find OpenGL, attempting to link against
-lGL. I understand for MinGW it's proper to link against -lopengl32 and
add -mwindows to the compiler flags. Would the proper thing to do here
be to add a check for the mingw system type in configure.ac and change
the CFLAGS and LIBS to -lopengl32 instead of -lGL?
My apologies if this is such an elementary question but if I could learn
more about this, I'd like to help ensure MinGW compatibility in more
packages and in my own software.
Again, this is sort of the first of a small number of issues I ran into,
but I'd like to take them one at a time instead of spamming the list
with problems.
If this is not the proper list, I'd appreciate some advice on finding
another.
Thank you,
Chris Thielen
13 years, 6 months
[Bug 543147] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_image - MinGW Windows port of the Image loading library for SDL
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543147
Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl
Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> 2010-09-27 07:35:34 EDT ---
Taking this for review.
My comments from bug 543154 (mingw32-SDL_mixer) also apply to this package.
In addition, is the line mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir} really necessary?
It doesn't make sense to me to create an empty %{_bindir} which isn't used in
the rest of the .spec file
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 6 months