RPM failed deps gone loopy

[Net Llama!]

The RPM builds & installs just fine.  Its really just a cosmetic thing, 
and i found it quite odd.  Mostly just an FYI.

Susan Macchia wrote:
> Ah crap, that s*ks.  Can you take the tarfile and build it manually?  A pain,
> but it may work, meanwhile you can let RH know how much they blew it...
> 
> Of course it may be that they relied on a 3rd party to create the rpm and they
> just included it in their distro (they still should have tested it though).
> 
> netllama at linux-sxs.org wrote:
> 
> 
>>Ya, its not every SRPM that does that just some of them, and they're all 
>>directly from RH-7.3.
>>
>>Susan Macchia wrote:
>>
>>>Lonni,
>>>
>>>You may have already done this, but I would try building another src.rpm to
>>>determine if the problem is with the rpm file (which I suspect), or with rpm
>>>itself.  Then, if the problem is the rpm file, whereever you got the src.rpm
>>>(redhat?) is who should fix the problem.  I bet its with the scripts
>>>that are used to build the source from the rpm or some such.
>>>
>>>Good luck and HTH
>>>
>>>netllama at linux-sxs.org wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>That could very well be the problem.  If so, its RedHat's fault, as all 
>>>>i've been doing is "rpm --rebuild <file.src.rpm>" and then attempting to 
>>>>install the resulting RPM.
>>>>
>>>>Susan Macchia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Lonni,
>>>>>
>>>>>I've been writing a lot of k-shell scripts lately; to execute and assign
>>>>
> the
> 
>>>>>value of an external "program", you would say, for example:
>>>>>
>>>>>foo=$(cat foobar)
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is why I am replying...  
>>>>>
>>>>>the LIST=$(...  looks like this - could be some kind of syntax error 
>>>>
>>>>somewhere
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>or something.  Just thought I'd throw this out as symptomatic of some
>>>>>script problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't know if this helps but...
>>>>>
>>>>>netllama at linux-sxs.org wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm in the process of rebuilding the RH-7.3 SRPMs, and then installing
>>>>>>them.  I'm starting to see some very very weird stuff, for failed
>>>>>>dependencies:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>CXXFLAGS   is needed by libsigc++-devel-1.0.3-5
>>>>>>LIST=$(shell   is needed by libsigc++-devel-1.0.3-5
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No, neither is a typo , that's exactly how they appeared.  I'm using the
>>>>>>exact same version of rpm that i've had for a few weeks (prior to the
>>>>>>manual upgrade i'm doing).
>>>>>
> 
> 
> =====
> _____________________________
> Susan Macchia
> mailto:susan at smacchia.net
> _____________________________
> 
> - Running Linux - because life is too short for reboots...
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
> http://launch.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
L. Friedman                       	       netllama at linux-sxs.org
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: 		    http://netllama.ipfox.com

   1:00pm  up 25 days, 19:54,  4 users,  load average: 0.25, 0.25, 0.34