[csw-maintainers] incoherent checkpkg result related to libXaw

[pfelecan]

>Am 01.03.2013 um 13:26 schrieb pfelecan <pfelecan at opencsw.org>:
>> I packaged TeXLive on February 25th and there were no errors during 
>> the checkpkg phase.
>>
>> Trying to upload the packages I get an error about a shared library 
>> not existing:
>>
>> * libXaw.so.5 could not be resolved for opt/csw/bin/xdvi-xaw, with 
>> rpath
>>   ('/opt/csw/lib/$ISALIST', '/opt/csw/lib', '/opt/csw/lib',
>>   '/usr/openwin/lib', '/opt/csw/lib', '/usr/lib/$ISALIST', 
>> '/usr/lib',
>>   '/lib/$ISALIST', '/lib'), expanded to ['/opt/csw/lib',
>>   '/opt/csw/lib/amd64', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium+mmx', 
>> '/opt/csw/lib/pentium',
>>   '/opt/csw/lib/i486', '/opt/csw/lib/i386', 
>> '/opt/csw/lib/pentium_pro',
>>   '/opt/csw/lib/i86', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', 
>> '/opt/csw/lib',
>>   '/opt/csw/lib', '/usr/openwin/lib', '/opt/csw/lib', '/usr/lib',
>>   '/usr/lib/amd64', '/usr/lib/pentium+mmx', '/usr/lib/pentium',
>>   '/usr/lib/i486', '/usr/lib/i386', '/usr/lib/pentium_pro', 
>> '/usr/lib/i86',
>>   '/usr/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', '/usr/lib', '/lib', '/lib/amd64',
>>   '/lib/pentium+mmx', '/lib/pentium', '/lib/i486', '/lib/i386',
>>   '/lib/pentium_pro', '/lib/i86', '/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', '/lib'], 
>> while the
>>   file was not present on the filesystem, nor in the packages under
>>   examination.
>>
>> for the texlive-binaries package.
>>
>> However, the library libXaw.so.5 exits in /usr/openwin/lib on a 
>> Solaris 10 installation.
>>
>> At the end of the upload output there is the usual phrase saying 
>> that:
>>
>> To see errors, run:
>>  /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release 
>> SunOS5.11 --architecture i386 ...
>>
>> This makes me think that this can be specific to Solaris 11 but it's 
>> just a supposition.
>
> This is indeed the case. libXaw.so.5 is part of 
> pkg:/x11/library/toolkit/libxaw5 which is
> specifically an addon: "This package provides a libXaw.so.5 binary 
> for backwards compatibility
> with programs compiled on older releases of Solaris.".
>
>> In conclusion, as I wrote in the subject line, there is an 
>> incoherency somewhere and not only about the incriminated library.
>>
>> Can a knowledgeable person have a look and suggest a corrective 
>> path?


> As we can't specify dependencies to such IPS packages yet I suggest 
> that I reregister
> the packages from unstable11* now the package is installed. This 
> should lead to checkpkg
> to pass.

Thank you Dag. When the re-registering is done let me know so as I can 
try to upload again.