From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 18 15:29:42 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625B81065673 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:29:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D348FC1C for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:29:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OEOjk-0007qE-Nh for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 May 2010 17:29:40 +0200 Received: from pool-70-21-10-109.res.east.verizon.net ([70.21.10.109]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 17:29:40 +0200 Received: from nightrecon by pool-70-21-10-109.res.east.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 17:29:40 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org connect(): No such file or directory From: Michael Powell Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.questions Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 11:29:21 -0400 Lines: 58 Message-ID: References: <4BF2AE6E.25460.4AF1564@d.forsyth.ru.ac.za> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-70-21-10-109.res.east.verizon.net Subject: re: building apr1 fails X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 15:29:42 -0000 DA Forsyth wrote: [snip] >> I just updated Apache to 2.2.15_5 yesterday and it builds fine when >> the above mentioned option is turned off. It was actually the day before yesterday, when it was still 2.2.15_5. > Yes indeed, I upgraded the main server yesterday and it built fine > except for having to turn 'mod_ssl' off as it kept dying in the ssl > code. I don't need ssl anyway. > > However, today an update (cvsup) shows that that option has been > removed entirely, I have just searched the Makefile to confirm it, > also mentioned in UPDATING. I see what you mean. I just csup'd and it is now apache-2.2.15_7, with the changes you described. So I just #'d out the WITHOUT_APR_FROM_PORTS=true line in my /var/db/ports/apache22/options file. Tried a simple portupgrade -a which usually does the trick for upgrading Apache painlessly, but it completely bombed with errors. > So now apache HAS to use devel/apr1 but apr1 will not compile with no > real clue as to why not. So I changed to /usr/ports/devel/apr1, built and installed this port manually to see if it would error out. It built and installed OK, pulling in some dependencies during the process. So I then tried to manually upgrade apache-2.2.15_5 with the make deinstall && make reinstall dance and it barfed because when apache compiles it builds the apr1 ports *again*. OK - so I pkg_deinstalled the apr1 install and did make clean for the apache build and started over. This time it built OK, and make deinstall && make reinstall succeeded. So now I somehow actually have upgraded to apache-2.2.15_7. > I have just finished upgrading perl to 5.10.1, with a forced > recompile of everything that depends on it, and of course > apache22/apr still fails. > Differences between us are that I am still using perl 5.8.9, and possibly I have an WITHOUT_X11= yes entry in my make.conf that you may not. You might try and see if the apr1 port will build and install by itself. I'm also wondering if my installing it, then removing it somehow left behind a file that the apache build process was expecting to be present. I recall somewhere in the process something complained that apr-1-config could not be found. The apr1 port does need to be removed because apache build will rebuild it a second time and bomb trying to install it if the port is already installed. As to exactly *why* I eventually succeeded I'm not entirely clear. :-) -Mike