From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 18 19:02:52 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A05216A41F for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 19:02:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oz@nixil.net) Received: from nixil.net (nixil.net [161.58.222.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95E0343D46 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 19:02:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oz@nixil.net) Received: from [10.20.12.64] (fw.oremut02.us.wh.verio.net [198.65.168.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by nixil.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j7IJ2T86059724 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:02:37 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4304DAE0.1040702@nixil.net> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:00:48 -0600 From: Phil Oleson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (X11/20050714) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Oberman References: <20050818165050.58B835D07@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: <20050818165050.58B835D07@ptavv.es.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (nixil.net [161.58.222.1]); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:02:37 -0600 (MDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.86.1/1033/Thu Aug 18 11:52:45 2005 on nixil.net X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: Stefan Farfeleder , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unable to build libedit X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 19:02:52 -0000 Kevin Oberman wrote: >>Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 15:34:39 +0200 >>From: Stefan Farfeleder >> >>On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 01:39:54PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >>>>Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 14:08:03 -0600 >>>>From: Phil Oleson >>>> >>>>Do you have rev 1.10 of histedit.h? Update this file in src/include as well. >>>> >>> >>>Thanks! >>> >>>This is clearly the file I was looking for, but I have: >>>/usr/include/histedit.h >>>/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/include/histedit.h >>>/usr/src/bin/sh/myhistedit.h >>>/usr/src/include/histedit.h >>> >>>All except /usr/include/histedit.h are 1.10. The make buildworld SHOULD >>>be using the one in /usr/src/include, as far as I know. Looks to me like >>>it's failing to find it and using the one in /usr/include instead. Or is >>>my limited understanding of the build process in error? >>> >>>And I can't explain where the one in /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/include >>>comes from. >> >>Strange. Did you test if it works without ccache? As I understand it >>the headers from src/include are temporarily installed to >>/usr/obj/[...]/tmp and then used by GCC to build the world. > > > Yes, I tried both with and without ccache. No difference. > > histedit.h has been at 1.9 for over two years and the Makefiles and .mk > files have had a LOT of tweaking since then. This system is a new > install that started with -current on about August 1. It should be > pretty clean. > > Of course, I could just copy 1.10 into /usr/include/sys, but I really > want to figure out why this is happening. I see myself spending too much > time in a maze of twisty .mk files, all different. :-) Personally, I'm still unsure why we have histedit.h pre-installed in src/include. This might be showing my ignorance of some of the build mechanisms in the main src tree, but wouldn't this work out better if histedit.h was located in src/lib/libedit until install time? Phil.