Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at

Bug 188430

Summary: Review Request: gtk+
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Rex Dieter <rdieter>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Ville Skyttä <scop>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: bugs.michael, mpeters
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-05-04 16:53:12 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On: 188429    
Bug Blocks: 163779    

Description Rex Dieter 2006-04-09 17:39:49 UTC
Spec Name or Url:
SRPM Name or Url:
The gtk+ package contains the GIMP ToolKit (GTK+), a library for
creating graphical user interfaces for the X Window System. GTK+ was
originally written for the GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) image
processing program, but is now used by several other programs as

Removed from devel/fc6 Core, intended for (fc6 only) Extras.

* Sat Apr 08 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT] 1:1.2.10-51
- cleanup for Extras
- drop Obsoletes: gtk (that must be *way* old)
- drop gdk-pixbuf debpendancy
- fix/re-enable gdkgtkdep patch
- no_undefined patch

Comment 1 Warren Togami 2006-04-09 19:40:48 UTC
Please add any dependencies here so it is clear which order we need to approve
and build things.

Comment 2 Ville Skyttä 2006-04-24 19:06:01 UTC
Skimming diffs only so far, random findings or comments:

- The %if "%{?fedora}" > "4" conditionals can be dropped for a FC6+ only package
- %check belongs logically after %install, especially if you insist on keeping
  the "|| :" in it too to support old distro versions
- Does the test suite work in "headless" build environments?  What about mock?
- Rationale for 444 perms for /etc/gtk/gtkrc?  I believe 644 would do just fine
- Possibly unowned %{_datadir}/themes dir (I haven't checked the dep tree)
- specfile not UTF-8

Comment 3 Rex Dieter 2006-04-24 19:22:06 UTC
(yes, gtk+ builds fine in mock, that's how I found out about the modular_x
dependancies the hard way...)

* Mon Apr 24 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]> 1:1.2.10-52
- install -m644 gtkrc ...
- utf-8 specfile
- comment %%fedora > 4 constructs
- own %%_datadir/themes
- move %%check after %%install

Spec Name or Url:
SRPM Name or Url:

Comment 4 Ville Skyttä 2006-05-03 21:12:58 UTC
Looks ok to me, just one final clarification:

The no-undefined patch is there just to help ensure that no undefined non-weak
symbols sneak out in the libs later?  The gtkgdkdep patch already results in
libgtk being linked with libgdk and takes care of them in this case, no?

FWIW, in case you didn't notice, glib has some undefined symbols as well in and

Comment 5 Rex Dieter 2006-05-04 12:39:54 UTC
Re: no-undefined patch.  You're right.  It's just to guarantee no future goofs.

Re: glib undefined symbols... hmm... I thought I had checked that, but it 
appears I only checked libglib, not the others.  Should be easy enough to fix.

Are we a go here then (APPROVED)?

Comment 6 Ville Skyttä 2006-05-04 15:42:07 UTC
Yep, approved, I just wanted to make sure I understand what the no-undefined
patch is for.

Comment 7 Rex Dieter 2006-05-04 16:53:12 UTC
Thanks, imported (build pending buildsys/devel working again).