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: bitgtkmm (Gtkmm widgets for the bit library) Alias: bitgtkmm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192052 ------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-07-29 20:07 EST ------- 8--> It's there. It's in the standard devel line, right above the specific requires that I add for bitgtkmm: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} <--8 D'oh! 8--> > Blocker : run rpm -qa --requires on the installed bitgtkmm. Quite a lot of the > output are for standard libs, but you cannot rely on people having gtkmm > installed (or a few of the others) Those are all added by rpmbuild. <--8 No. These are packages required to run. Say I didn't have atkmm on my machine (just as an example). Without the R atkmm being explictly states in the spec file, the package would know no better until it gets to a point that atkmm is needed and then it falls over dead. I had a similar problem with Anjuta-1.2.4a a while back in that gtkmm was not in as an explicit R. However, when you came to try and create a gtkmm package, the software complained like crazy. Add the R line for gtkmm and everything was happy again. -- 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