From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 6 07:58:15 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB6E16A419; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:58:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57E5F13C459; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:58:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (p54A55A8D.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.90.141]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CB42E146; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:58:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C376B5B5A04; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:55:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l767trs9037257; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:55:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 09:55:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20070806095553.l75rul9eok0kw004@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 09:55:53 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Boris Samorodov References: <52921778@bsam.ru> <1186178328.46188.2.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <86849396@bsam.ru> In-Reply-To: <86849396@bsam.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4) / FreeBSD-7.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-13.35, required 8, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_POLICY_SIGNSOME 0.00, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE 1.40, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10, TW_GD 0.08, TW_GT 0.08) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: emulation@FreeBSD.org, kris@FreeBSD.org, pav@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ldconfig when PACKAGE_BUILDING=YES (and linux ports) X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 07:58:16 -0000 Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Sat, 04 Aug 2007 02:09:47 +0400)= : [CCing emulation@...] > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 23:58:47 +0200 Pav Lucistnik wrote: >> Boris Samorodov p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v so 04. 08. 2007 v 01:30 +0400: > >> > Seems that running ldconfig while building a package at package >> > cluster (i.e. when PACKAGE_BUILDING is defined) is quite useless. [1] >> > >> > To be more specific I'm interested at linux ports. ATM we run linux >> > ldconfig (using linuxulator) _at package building_. Hence to create a >> > package for FC6 port we should change compat.linux.osrelease (which I >> > don't like and try to avoid). If the "ldconfig" stage may be skipped >> > when PACKAGE_BUILDING is defined then things get way too easier both >> > for default kernel linux.osrelease and default linux_base port change. > >> I don't follow - what is the problem? > > An FC6 port can't be build (and more specific -- linux-fc6 ldconfig > doesn't run) with current default compat.linux.osrelease=3D2.4.2. So > this sysctl should be changed to 2.6.16 for package building sake. > When the default compat.linux.osrelease will be switched to 2.6.16 we > will get the other way round problem if we try to build and FC4 port. > > I don't like the status quo and want to find a way to siplify it. It's not only a ldconfig problem, it's a generic problem. The gtk =20 ports run plugin detection programs (gtk-query-immodules-2.0-32 and =20 gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32) at installation time. Do you think it is a problem when the non-default linux port is not =20 available as a package? Currently I don't think it is a big problem =20 (you can check the value of the sysctl and IGNORE if it is not ok). When we switch the default, it will be a problem for those releases =20 which we still support but which have not the "good" default value for =20 the linux emulation (AFAIK pointyhat is running -current with some =20 jails for RELENG_x builds). One workaround would be that portmgr sets =20 the right value in the jail for the package build for the =20 corresponding release. This would be the cleanest solution, as all =20 linux ports are then build in the right environment and we don't have =20 to add magic code to every linux port (or bsd.port.mk). Kris, your opinion? Bye, Alexander. --=20 Howe's Law: =09Everyone has a scheme that will not work. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137