[Bug 933809] New: balsa is broken -- undefined symbol cairo_surface_set_device_scale
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809 Bug ID: 933809 Summary: balsa is broken -- undefined symbol cairo_surface_set_device_scale Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: 13.2 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: X11 Applications Assignee: bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: bluedzins@wp.pl QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- After installing balsa (balsa-2.5.1-4.2.1.x86_64) and its dependencies, when I try to run it I get this error: balsa: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37: undefined symbol: cairo_surface_set_device_scale -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
Bernhard Wiedemann
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
--- Comment #2 from Atri Bhattacharya
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
macias -
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
macias -
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
--- Comment #10 from Atri Bhattacharya
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
--- Comment #11 from Dominique Leuenberger
Bjorn, Dominique, what do you guys suggest?
I don't see a maint update for this necessary - if the user would have kept the system up-to-date, there would not have been an issue in first place. Also: addin a versioned dep to a lib is not going to happen - if at all, we want upstream to introduce symbol versioning... but that's a lengthy uphill battle -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
--- Comment #12 from macias -
if the user would have kept the system up-to-date, there would not have been an issue in first place.
I am not sure I understand -- you mean you now rely on entire system to have the newest software in order to some package to work? What are the rpm dependencies for then? You don't know the reason the user didn't update the system, but I can come with one solid piece -- software is buggy as hell, I reported many bugs, which were _not_ handled for years. So why I should update some software and risk new bugs or regressions, if my current version works for me? Few months ago I installed some updates and my system started freezing constantly, so unless something it is _required_ I am not willing to take any risks. And when user faces such problem as with balsa, he/she should update __entire__ system for just mail client because some rpm misses accurate dependency? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
Martin Pluskal
if the user would have kept the system up-to-date, there would not have been an issue in first place.
I am not sure I understand -- you mean you now rely on entire system to have the newest software in order to some package to work? Now? It was ever supported? I am not sure if you realize how difficult that would be. What are the rpm dependencies for then? See previous comment for reasons why correct dependencies were not generated.
You don't know the reason the user didn't update the system, but I can come with one solid piece -- software is buggy as hell, I reported many bugs, which were _not_ handled for years. I am very sorry to hear that. So why I should update some software and risk new bugs or regressions, if my current version works for me? Few months ago I installed some updates and my system started freezing constantly, so unless something it is _required_ I am not willing to take any risks. Users who don't install updates can usually avoid such problems by not installing new software.
And when user faces such problem as with balsa, he/she should update __entire__ system for just mail client because some rpm misses accurate dependency?
-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
--- Comment #14 from macias -
I am not sure I understand -- you mean you now rely on entire system to have the newest software in order to some package to work?
Now? It was ever supported?
Of course. I am surprised you are surprised :-), and that this is "a problem". I see package ABC 2.1 requiring package DEF 4.0.8 (or later) all the time. I don't track history of rpm, but it is supported for as long as I remember as well. Approach "to make ABC 2.1 work please update _all_ installed software" I see for the very first time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=933809
Atri Bhattacharya
I am not sure I understand -- you mean you now rely on entire system to have the newest software in order to some package to work?
Now? It was ever supported?
Of course. I am surprised you are surprised :-), and that this is "a problem". I see package ABC 2.1 requiring package DEF 4.0.8 (or later) all the time. I don't track history of rpm, but it is supported for as long as I remember as well.
Not for libraries unless they explicitly require versioned deps themselves, see Dominique's response.
Approach "to make ABC 2.1 work please update _all_ installed software" I see for the very first time.
Official updates (and btw, distro upgrade 13.1 -> 13.2 too) are only supported assuming one installs all previous updates. If you lock arbitrary packages or pick and choose single updates, you are on your own. You probably wouldn't run into something "unfixable", as you just found out, but it is something you will have to fix by yourself. And before the discussion devolves into policy issues... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com