[scmbug-users] Scmbug error 79: Package 'Bugzilla' not foundin installation

Kristis Makris kristis.makris at asu.edu
Thu Feb 14 18:34:28 UTC 2008


Hello Bugzilla Developers,

We are experiencing a problem with Scmbug when Scmbug attempts to reuse
the Bugzilla 3.0.3 API. It seems that checking for presence of the
"Bugzilla.pm" package fails.

The full thread of this discussion is at:

http://lists.mkgnu.net/pipermail/scmbug-users/2008-February/001777.html

John confirmed that this isn't due to a permissions error. His
environment is:

scmbug 0-23-4
bugzilla 3.0 and bugzilla 3.0.3
OS: Solaris 8
Perl 5.8.8
MySQL 5.0

My question to the Bugzilla developers is has a similar issue (I'm
inclined to attribute this to Solaris) been reported before by people
trying to use the Bugzilla API ?

Incidentally, the code Scmbug uses to check for the presence of a
package was copy-pasted from checksetup.pl:have_vers() from Bugzilla
2.20, which now seems to have been moved in Bugzilla 3.0 in
Bugzilla/Install/Requirements.pm. Do you know if there are any issues
related to have_vers on Solaris ?



> >On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 10:58 -0500, John Coffie wrote:
> > > It appears that I can get the scmbug_daemon to start if I do the 
> >following
> > > in /proj/apps/scmbug/share/scmbug/lib/Scmbug/Common.pm:
> > >
> > > sub package_exists {
> > >    :
> > >    :
> > >   }elsif ($package_name eq "Bugzilla) {
> > >      $cmd = "require Bugzilla::Bug";
> > > } else {
> > >    :
> > >    :
> > > }
> > >
> > > I hardcoded the package name 'Bugzilla' to 'Bugzilla::Bug'.
> > >
> > > This enabled me to get past this higher level package. All subsequent
> > > "Buzilla::XXX" packages processed fine.
> > >
> > > The "Bugzilla.pm" file that is in the bugzilla installation directory is 
> >not
> > > found by the Common.pm package. It dies at the '( ! eval ($cmd)) section 
> >of
> > > 'Common.pm'.
> > >
> > > Packages that work:
> > >
> > > /proj/apps/bugzilla/Bugzilla/XXX.pm
> > >
> > > package that doesn't work:
> > >
> > > /proj/apps/bugzilla/Bugzilla.pm (this DOES exist and is the @INC when
> > > printed to STDOUT).
> > >
> > > What gives?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20080214/baf1718d/attachment.sig>


More information about the developers mailing list