On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 07:57:45PM -0500, Richard Tibbetts wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 11:27:18AM +1100, matthew green wrote: > > > > In the current chroot, /usr/include/db.h and /usr/include/db2/db.h > > seem to be from the netbsd db1. /usr/lib/libdb2.* seem to be the > > libraries from the debian db2 package. /usr/lib/libdb.* are symlinks > > to the db2 libraries. This is helping to cause the apt build to fail. > > It is also probably wrong, at least in the long term. > > > > Anyone have detail about why things are set up this way? I'm going to > > start looking into getting db1 (netbsd's or debian's) built and > > packaged. Let me know if this is the wrong thing. > > > > > > netbsd libc includes (a very very bugfixed) db1. that's what <db.h> > > is for. dunno what the <db2/db.h> is from though. > > db2/db.h is supposed to be from libdb2-dev, part of the db2 source > package in netbsd. Thats all well and good, though I am having trouble > building my own copy of this package, due to issues with db1 libraries. > > db1 libraries are in libc on linux and on netbsd. In netbsd, the > library is actually part of libc. However, in glibc it is part of the > source package but gets built as its own library. > > Solutions to this include fixing build systems, or providing a stub > /usr/lib/libdb1.* as part of the netbsd libc package. Does anyone have > opinions about this? I should think that most build systems would get > this right, but the two I have found (db2 and apt) don't. You should fix the build systems. I think you can easily fix it with adding an autoconf check if the build systems doesn't get it right. They have to check it anyhow if you compile them on *BSD instead of Debian GNU/*BSD. Most of the time portability is a better thing than some dirty hacks. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpmjgotbgVRd.pgp
Description: PGP signature