Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 10:33:03 -0000 From: Ian Vaudrey <i.vaudrey@cableinet.co.uk> To: "'Jordan K. Hubbard'" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: "'Satoshi Asami'" <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>, "'ports@freebsd.org'" <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Ranlib Message-ID: <01BCE90D.0B2741A0@nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04 November 1997 10:06, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > * > I can reproduce the problem with at least one existing port, libmalloc-1 > .18, > > * > I haven't tried any others but if I'm right about the cause it'll happen > > * > with any port that has an @exec ranlib line in the PLIST. > > * > > * I'll take a look at it. Like I said, @exec lines aren't even supposed > > * to be _run_ by pkg_delete so this would be a very peculiar situation > > * of so. > > > > No, he's right. "@exec ranlib" is run by pkg_add, and that changes > > the md5 checksum, which causes pkg_delete to choke. > > Ahhhh. Now that's different! He said that the @exec line was being > run by pkg_delete, not that it was fooling the md5 check into failing. No, I never said that the @exec line was being run by pkg_delete. In my first mail I wrote "the @exec line seems to break pkg_delete", I was deliberately brief because I just wanted to know if I could lose the @exec ranlib line. In my second mail I elaborated "I put this down to something (the md5 signature?) being changed by the @exec ranlib line - which is of course run by pkg_add, although the error isn't produced until pkg_delete is run.". My apologies if that still wasn't clear enough. > Yeah, I can see how that would happen. > > Hmmmm. Is the ranlib even necessary with the GNU loader? If not, why > not just take that out? That was the gist of my original mail :) > > Jordan > - Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01BCE90D.0B2741A0>