Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 704732 - sys-apps/portage: failure to resolve libfreetype.so for dev-java/openjdk-bin-11.0.4_p11
Summary: sys-apps/portage: failure to resolve libfreetype.so for dev-java/openjdk-bin-...
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Core - Dependencies (show other bugs)
Hardware: All All
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 694246
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2020-01-03 23:26 UTC by Zac Medico
Modified: 2020-01-03 23:54 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2020-01-03 23:26:15 UTC
The output of emerge -p --depclean --ignore-soname-deps=n shows this:

> * Broken soname dependencies found:
> *
> *   x86_64: libfreetype.so required by:
> *     dev-java/openjdk-bin-11.0.4_p11
> *

Meanwhile, the dependency is actually satisfied:

> $ ls -l /usr/lib64/libfreetype*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root     21 Feb 19  2019 /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so -> libfreetype.so.6.16.1
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root     21 Feb 19  2019 /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so.6 -> libfreetype.so.6.16.1
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 769224 Feb 19  2019 /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so.6.16.1

The problem is that portage fails to recognize that libfreetype.so is satisfied because it does not correspond to an soname. The soname is actually libfreetype.so.6.
Comment 1 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2020-01-03 23:49:44 UTC
Maybe this indicates a flaw in the openjdk build system, since linking directly to libfreetype.so could be bad if for example we have a bump from libfreetype.so.6 to libfreetype.so.7 and libfreetype.so now refers to libfreetype.so.7 which is incompatible with the installed openjdk instance.
Comment 2 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2020-01-03 23:54:19 UTC
(In reply to Zac Medico from comment #1)
> Maybe this indicates a flaw in the openjdk build system, since linking
> directly to libfreetype.so could be bad if for example we have a bump from
> libfreetype.so.6 to libfreetype.so.7 and libfreetype.so now refers to
> libfreetype.so.7 which is incompatible with the installed openjdk instance.

Going with the above interpretation for now. The issue does not affect the latest dev-java/openjdk-11.0.5_p10 ebuild.