On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Rex Dieter wrote:
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Rex Dieter wrote:
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
Has anyone built the clearsilver-0.10.2-2.fc4.src.rpm from Extras for PPC
or PPC64?
I guess there was good reason that FE didn't include a PPC build... (-:
Well, sure there's
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/4/ppc/clearsilver-0.10.2-2.fc4.ppc.rpm.
But it seems as though I ought to be able to duplicate the feat. The
destination is a RHEL4 PPC64 system, so I'm concerned about dependencies.
My apologies, I didn't read far enough to see you were trying to rebuild for
RHEL4. (Wow, I didn't there even was a rhel4 build for ppc, cool!).
No problem. It is pretty cool: 32-node IBM OpenPower with dual-core P5s
running RHAS4 (or Suse). I'd like to put Trac on it for our user group,
but the ClearSilver issue is a showstopper. (Annoyingly, python-sqlite
also has issues due to conflicts between PPC and PPC64 packages. There
must be something in multilib packages to allow conflicting binaries in
32-bit and 64-bit versions to resolve their differences peacefully.)
It's hard to know whom to complain to. Is it a packaging issue (Dag and
Extras exhibit the same symptoms, but neither is specifically designed for
PPC64) or upstream?
-- Rex
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
