Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:49:20 -0800 From: Drew Tomlinson <drew@mykitchentable.net> To: danny@ricin.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Failure At Build (?) Stage When Making Ports? Message-ID: <4051DC00.1000009@mykitchentable.net> In-Reply-To: <200403120114.00830.danny@ricin.com> References: <4050C378.7040802@mykitchentable.net> <200403120114.00830.danny@ricin.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Danny Pansters told a big fish story including the following on 03/11/2004 4:14 PM: >On Thursday 11 March 2004 20:52, Drew Tomlinson wrote: > > >>I'm trying to do things the "smart" way. I have two machines running >>4.9. Instead of keeping a ports collection on both, I have and update >>the collection on one named blacklamb. Blacklamb runs Samba 2.2.8a_1. >>I created a samba share called "ports" and pointed it to /usr/ports. I >>then used smbfs to mount "ports" on blacksheep (the other machine) at >>/usr/ports. Here's the relevant portion of /etc/fstab from blacksheep: >> >>blacksheep> cat /etc/fstab >># Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump >>Pass# >>//<account>@blacklamb/ports /usr/ports smbfs rw,noauto 0 >>0 >> >>On both machines, I edited /etc/make.conf to set "WRKDIRPREFIX=/var/tmp" >>so each would use it's own disk space when making ports. >> >>Ports build without error on blacklamb, the machine that has the ports >>tree locally but when building on blacksheep, they always fail. I've >>read the Porter's Handbook to see what I could figure out. I think >>blacksheep is failing at the actual "build" stage. I posted a complete >>build log of an attempt to build the bacula client at >>http://drew.mykitchentable.net/Temp/blacksheep_bacula.txt. >> >>All attempts to build ports on blacksheep fail at this same point. I >>have no idea what to check next so any help would be greatly appreciated. >> >> > >Looking at the output I noticed it was >in /usr/var/tmp/usr/ports/theport/workdir/and/all/that. > >Was that the intention? Or is there some symlink /usr/var to /var, considering >the WRKDIRPREFIX. Since the 'depend' step seems to work fine, your method in >itself can't be wrong. Maybe you need to use hard links for some reason that >I can't quite grasp (yet)... > > I set my system up with a 100MB / and the rest as /usr. So yes, tmp is symlinked to /var/tmp and usr is symlinked to /usr/var. >If you're doing something with symlinks, I'd look there first for an >explanation why the build fails. It says 'can't read makefile'. You should be >able to find out which one that is (have it build locally without cleaning). > > However, the machine that has the ports tree install locally (blacklamb) is setup the same way. A smaller root partition and the rest as /usr with symlinks. Ports build OK on blacklamb using both make and portupgrade. >Amplify this if you also have a symlink /tmp to /var/tmp (consider scripts >using '../..' in paths etc). Does the same thing occur without using >portupgrade (which certainly uses /tmp), e.g. just make? > > Problem on blacksheep occurs with both make and portupgrade. I'm going out of town for the weekend but will experiment when I return. Maybe in the meantime someone can either confirm or deny your suspicions. :) Thanks for your help!!! Drew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4051DC00.1000009>