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: openpbx - The truly open source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210025 ------- Additional Comments From jeff@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-13 09:31 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #0) > > > > Finally, rpmlint complains of dangling relative symlinks and > > 'only-non-binary-in-usr-lib' because of the foo.so symlinks in the > > -devel package. I'm not entirely sure what its problem is there, but > > I don't see anything wrong. Please advise. > > I think that the dangling relative symlinks are because "libfoo.so" is > a symlink to "libfoo.so.0.0.0" but the soname embedded in the library > is "libfoo.so.0". RPM detects the soname and adds a "Requires: > libfoo.so.0" to the -devel package, so without the manual "Requires: > openpbx = %{version}-%{release}" installing the -devel package > wouldn't pull in the main package. The proper fix would be to figure > out why libtool is installing the libs in this way. The quick fix > would be to delete and recreate the "libfoo.so" symlink after "make > install" does it's thing. I think that something like the following > should fix it: > > for l in libopenpbx.so libedit.so libopbxilbc.so libopbxjb.so > do > rm -f %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/openpbx.org/$l > ln -s $l.0 %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/openpbx.org/$l > done And of course, I should have waited for my build to finish before posting. The above fix didn't work... -- 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