Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: silgraphite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176071 ------- Additional Comments From mpeters@xxxxxxx 2006-06-27 06:49 EST ------- The gymnastics are unfortunately necessary because pango does not do multilib correctly. An /etc/pango/pangorc is used to tell pango where additional modules are. Unfortunately both 32 bit and 64 bit pango look for the same file. So if you have 64-bit linux and have installed 32-bit firefox, that would pull in 32-bit pango - and the /etc/pango/pangorc file can only be correct for 32 bit or 64 bit, it can't be correct for both because of /usr/lib64 vs /usr/lib. pango upstream seems to be at disagreement with silgraphite, they think silgraphite should install the pango modules in the top level pango module directory. But the silgraphite coders need to make sure that their modules are loaded after the core pango modules. From what I understand, upstream pango considers that to be a design bug. My understanding is that a future version of upstream pango is going to do this better so that even with what they consider to be a "design bug" in silgraphite, multilib will be handled better. Both 32 and 64 bit pango looking at the same config file with full path %{_libdir} in it is definitely wrong and they apparently are addressing that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review