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 bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 716016 - FTBFS nfs-utils-1.2.3-13.fc16
Summary: FTBFS nfs-utils-1.2.3-13.fc16
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: nfs-utils
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
high
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Steve Dickson
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/Fi...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: F16FTBFS
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-06-23 15:58 UTC by FTBFS
Modified: 2011-12-15 16:13 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-04 17:49:43 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
root.log (246.12 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
build.log (17.10 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
mock.log (1.27 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
root.log (358.12 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
build.log (17.20 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
mock.log (1.22 KB, text/plain)
2011-06-23 15:58 UTC, FTBFS 		no flags Details
View All

Description FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:16 UTC 
nfs-utils-1.2.3-13.fc16.src.rpm Failed To Build From Source against the rawhide tree.  See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FTBFS for more information.
If you believe this is actually a bug in another package, do NOT change the component in this bug or close this bug.  Instead, add the appropriate bug number from the other package to the "Depends on" line in this bug.  If the other package does not yet have a bug created that you think matches, please create one.  Doing so helps us properly track bugs and their dependencies, just as we track package dependencies.  (If you close this bug, and the other package is not fixed before the next FTBFS run, a new bug will get created.  Please follow the above advice to avoid such duplication.)
Comment 1 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:21 UTC 
Created attachment 508408 [details]
root.log


root.log for i386
Comment 2 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:22 UTC 
Created attachment 508409 [details]
build.log


build.log for i386
Comment 3 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:24 UTC 
Created attachment 508410 [details]
mock.log


mock.log for i386
Comment 4 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:25 UTC 
Created attachment 508411 [details]
root.log


root.log for x86_64
Comment 5 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:26 UTC 
Created attachment 508412 [details]
build.log


build.log for x86_64
Comment 6 FTBFS 2011-06-23 15:58:28 UTC 
Created attachment 508413 [details]
mock.log


mock.log for x86_64
Comment 7 J. Bruce Fields 2011-06-23 16:22:07 UTC 
Failed to find librpcsecgss; from the end of the build log:

checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config
checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes
checking for GSSGLUE... yes
checking for RPCSECGSS... no
configure: error: Package requirements (librpcsecgss >= 0.16) were not met:
No package 'librpcsecgss' found
Consider adjusting the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable if you
installed software in a non-standard prefix.
Alternatively, you may set the environment variables RPCSECGSS_CFLAGS
and RPCSECGSS_LIBS to avoid the need to call pkg-config.
See the pkg-config man page for more details.
Comment 8 Jeff Layton 2011-06-23 17:13:41 UTC 
More importantly...

    checking for clnt_tli_create in -ltirpc... no
    configure: WARNING: libtirpc not found. TIRPC disabled!

librpcsecgss shouldn't be necessary now. I wonder if this is trying to build against the known broken libtirpc? Would be nice to have the config.log....
Comment 9 Jeff Layton 2011-06-23 20:04:50 UTC 
Yeah, looking back through the logs:

DEBUG util.py:250:   REQ:  libtirpc-devel
DEBUG util.py:250:   --> libtirpc-devel-0.2.2-0.fc16.i686

...and that libtirpc is known to be broken such that you can't link against it (see bug 705412). I think this should now build fine as long as they use 0.2.2-1. Not quite sure why the older package was used here though since the fix went in a few days ago.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.