Bugzilla Bug 199218

gnome-extra/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3 fails to compile on ppc64:

db2omf: Could not construct the OMF maintainer element. 
 Add an author, corpauthor, editor, othercredit, or publisher 
 element with the role attribute set to "maintainer" to
gnome-power-manager.xml. 
 xsltproc -o gnome-power-manager-sv.omf --stringparam db2omf.basename
gnome-power-manager --stringparam db2omf.format 'docbook' --stringparam
db2omf.dtd "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.3//EN" --stringparam db2omf.lang sv
--stringparam db2omf.omf_dir "/usr/share/omf" --stringparam db2omf.help_dir
"/usr/share/gnome/help" --stringparam db2omf.omf_in
"`pwd`/./gnome-power-manager.omf.in" `/usr/bin/pkg-config --variable db2omf
gnome-doc-utils` sv/gnome-power-manager.xml 
 make[2]: *** [gnome-power-manager-C.omf] Error 10 
 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... 
 db2omf: Could not construct the OMF maintainer element. 
 Add an author, corpauthor, editor, othercredit, or publisher 
 element with the role attribute set to "maintainer" to
gnome-power-manager.xml. 
 make[2]: *** [gnome-power-manager-ru.omf] Error 10 
 db2omf: Could not construct the OMF maintainer element. 
 Add an author, corpauthor, editor, othercredit, or publisher 
 element with the role attribute set to "maintainer" to
gnome-power-manager.xml. 
 make[2]: *** [gnome-power-manager-sv.omf] Error 10 
 make[2]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/gnome-extra/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3/work/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3/help' 
 make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 
 make[1]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/gnome-extra/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3/work/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3' 
 make: *** [all] Error 2 



this is because 2.16.3 won't compile with gnome-doc-utils-0.10.3 (it compiles
with 0.8.0). the reason this wasn't discovered so long is because everybody in
the ppc64 teams seems to have upgraded from gnome 2.16 to gnome 2.18 and so
already had 2.16.3 installed. Now that we are building packages for 2007.1 we
finaly discovert this. (this is also mentioned in the forums now:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-601898.html)


I suggest we apply the following patch to gnome-2.18.3.ebuild:

Index: gnome-2.18.3.ebuild
===================================================================
RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/gnome-base/gnome/gnome-2.18.3.ebuild,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -B -r1.10 gnome-2.18.3.ebuild
--- gnome-2.18.3.ebuild 6 Nov 2007 17:10:57 -0000       1.10
+++ gnome-2.18.3.ebuild 15 Nov 2007 09:19:56 -0000
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@

 # when unmasking for an arch
 # double check none of the deps are still masked !
-KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc sparc x86 ~x86-fbsd"
+KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86 ~x86-fbsd"

 IUSE="accessibility cdr cups dvdr ldap mono"

@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@

        >=gnome-extra/gnome-screensaver-2.18.2
        >=x11-misc/alacarte-0.11.3
-       >=gnome-extra/gnome-power-manager-2.18.3
+       !ppc64? ( >=gnome-extra/gnome-power-manager-2.18.3 )
        >=gnome-base/gnome-volume-manager-2.17.0

        accessibility? (



there are two packages which need to go stable with gnome-2.18.3 on ppc64:

gnome-base/gnome/gnome-2.18.3.ebuild:
ppc64(default-linux/ppc/ppc64/2006.1/64bit-userland)
['>=app-accessibility/orca-2.18.1', '>=gnome-extra/bug-buddy-2.18.1']


@gnome herd: can I make gnome-power-manager a conditional dependency for
gnome-2.18.3 only? once we have hal stable and so can use a newer
gnome-power-manger I would remove this condition again.

The sooner we can get a resolution on this the better.  This is impacting
2007.1 for me now.  As well as having brokeness in the current tree.

Go ahead.
Also note that I'm targeting Gnome-2.20 for the release - I just don't know yet
for sure if release team will go with it anymore. Due to some mess we
prematurely decided to wait out roughly 30 days out of unmask and I'm filing
stabilization before weekend now, 1.5-2 weeks later than previously planned for
release.

fixed in CVS.

wolf: sorry, we are late again with fixing *things*.. Can you please inject the
changes from the following packages into the snapshot?

app-accessibility/orca
gnome-extra/bug-buddy
gnome-base/gnome

the fix isn't right. The doc is just borked. 2.16 will die soon enough anyway.

Without some sort of fix, ppc64 cannot compile gnome.  Recommendations?

Well, gnome-power-manager was made to not be required for gnome-2.18.3 meta, so
is this a problem for the release?
I wonder if the 2.18 or 2.20 gnome-power-manager/HAL problems can't get
fixed...

(In reply to comment #4)
> the fix isn't right. The doc is just borked. 2.16 will die soon enough anyway.

I don't get it. What do you mean with "doc is borked"? Which doc is broken?

This sure isn't the right fix, but it's a 'workaround' so users are able to
compile gnome.

once we have fixed the hal issue we will sure add gnome-power-manager back in.

(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > the fix isn't right. The doc is just borked. 2.16 will die soon enough anyway.
> 
> I don't get it. What do you mean with "doc is borked"? Which doc is broken?

ah.. never write comments, when you haven't had your coffee yet...

you meant the doc, which makes gnome-power-manager fail...

*** Bug 184889 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Created an attachment (id=136630) [details]
gnome-power-manager-2.16.3-doc.patch

Fix to build.

(In reply to comment #10)
> Created an attachment (id=136630) [edit] [details]
> gnome-power-manager-2.16.3-doc.patch
> 
> Fix to build.
> 

+  21 Nov 2007; Samuli Suominen <drac@gentoo.org>
+  +files/gnome-power-manager-2.16.3-doc.patch,
+  gnome-power-manager-2.16.3.ebuild:
+  Fix documentation issues wrt bug #199218.

In CVS.