Re: Bug#897168: proftp: FTBFS on kfreebsd
On 29 Apr 2018, at 22:06, Hilmar Preuße <hille42@web.de> wrote:
>
> On 29.04.2018 14:01, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
>
> Hi debian-bsd people,
>
> I just noticed that our package fails to build on kfreebsd:
>
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=proftpd-dfsg&arch=kfreebsd-amd64&ver=1.3.6-2&stamp=1524996945&raw=0
>
> Could you help us here? proftp seems to build on FreeBSD in general so
> there seems to be something specific to this port.
>
> Thanks!
>
>> * What led up to the situation?
>>
>> Since we uploaded proftp 1.3.6 to unstable the package fails to build on
>> kfreebsd, on i386 and kfreebsd-amd64. The last lines of the log are:
>>
>> src/fsio.o: In function `sys_fsetxattr':
>> ./fsio.c:1018: undefined reference to `extattr_set_fd'
>> src/fsio.o: In function `unix_flistxattr':
>> ./fsio.c:640: undefined reference to `extattr_list_fd'
>> ./fsio.c:640: undefined reference to `extattr_list_fd'
>> src/fsio.o: In function `unix_llistxattr':
>> ./fsio.c:621: undefined reference to `extattr_list_file'
>> ./fsio.c:621: undefined reference to `extattr_list_file'
>> src/fsio.o: In function `unix_listxattr':
>> ./fsio.c:602: undefined reference to `extattr_list_file'
>> ./fsio.c:602: undefined reference to `extattr_list_file'
>> src/fsio.o: In function `sys_fremovexattr':
>> ./fsio.c:885: undefined reference to `extattr_delete_fd'
>> src/fsio.o: In function `sys_fgetxattr':
>> ./fsio.c:529: undefined reference to `extattr_get_fd'
>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>> libtool: link: rm -f ".libs/proftpdS.o"
>>
>> I guess some libs, needed for linking are not specified. I file that bug as
>> important as FreeBSD is not a release arch.
>>
The problem here is that kfreebsd-kernel-headers provides sys/extattr.h with
these prototypes and so proftpd's configure defines HAVE_SYS_EXTATTR_H, but
glibc doesn't implement them, and the Linux equivalents are currently just
stubs that return -1 with errno=ENOSYS. Thus for now I suggest you build
proftpd with --disable-xattr.
James
Reply to: