[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Checking buildd logs



On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 02:55:36PM -0800, Rick Younie wrote:
> #117993.
> libfwbuilder-dev built incorrectly so the other packages
> using libfwbuilder-config got this,
> 
> # libfwbuilder-config --libs
> -L/usr/lib -lfwbuilder -lssl -lcrypto -lsnmp -lgthread -lglib -lxslt -lxml2 -lsigc -lpthread /usr/lib/libresolv.a
> 

Rick,

	This is exactly the issue that got me looking into it... The m68k
build was the only one that had the ssl built into it... All the other 
buildd's did not... So I went looking for my other packages and found that
libesmtp was also build with SSL on m68k and no others... Fortunately
libesmtp has the "--with-openssl=no" option for the configure script but
I need to mention to upstream on fwbuilder/libfwbuilder that their configure
script is lacking such an option... Thus the only way to ensure that the
builds are without SSL support is to make use of Build-Depends...

Taken from buildd.d.o log for libesmtp_0.8.6-1 m68k logs:

*************************
*** libESMTP features ***
*************************
            --with-auth-plugin-dir: /usr/lib/esmtp
                      --with-lwres: no
                    --with-openssl: yes
                 --enable-pthreads: yes
                     --enable-etrn: yes
                     --enable-xusr: yes
   --enable-require-all-recipients: yes
                    --enable-debug: no

Taken from buildd.d.o log for libesmtp_0.8.6-1 alpha logs:

*************************
*** libESMTP features ***
*************************
            --with-auth-plugin-dir: /usr/lib/esmtp
                      --with-lwres: no
                    --with-openssl: no
                 --enable-pthreads: yes
                     --enable-etrn: yes
                     --enable-xusr: yes
   --enable-require-all-recipients: yes
                    --enable-debug: no

	The build of 0.8.6-2 with Build-Conflicts and "--with-openssl=no"
was built without the SSL support...

	Jeremy



Reply to: