Re: Autobuilder update
On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 10:51:31PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 03:28:21PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> > 1) the various PNG libraries (I can't remember ATM which one failed...
> > I think some worked OK but some wouldn't build.)
>
> I seem to remember that at least some of those build themselves with 2
> digit versions and then the files don't get copied into packages
> correctly.
That's pretty common with libraries. Watch out for libtool + dh_move.
libtool wants to use the BSD naming conventions for libraries, and
dh_move has hardcoded filenames. (Bad idea, IMHO.) On FreeBSD, I get
things like libfoo.so.5, where on Debian, libtool would build
libfoo.so.4.0.10. IIRC, NetBSD would use libfoo.so.4.10 or something
similar.
Usually the fix is to hack libtool. Sometimes you can get away with just
copying libtool from the libtool package, which you've presumably
already fixed. Sometimes that doesn't work, and you have to hack the
particular version of libtool in the package. :(
> > 2) GTK
>
> Mm. Never tried that one...
I vaguely recall having some problems with it, but it's been a long
time. Sometimes the best thing to do is to see if you can get a clean
build with configure and make. That can help a lot in trouble-shooting.
If you have problems with that, look in /usr/ports (or pkgsrc), and see
if there are any patches that look relevant to the problem.
> > 3) the utmp bug (blocks PAM and anything that uses it)
>
> I've had working PAM before - what's the issue? Just the different utmpx
> semantics?
Probably that and pam_unix wanting <shadow.h> and everything in it.
---Nathan
Reply to: