Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 17:02:54 +0400 From: Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru> To: Renato Botelho <garga@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libiconv problem on dansguardian-(devel) Message-ID: <525FDFFE.8050508@passap.ru> In-Reply-To: <525FDE61.70109@FreeBSD.org> References: <20131017131934.09d016cf4abfe5c6926e40d7@mimar.rs> <525FDA4B.4060509@passap.ru> <525FDE61.70109@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
17.10.2013 16:56, Renato Botelho пишет:
> On 17-10-2013 09:38, Boris Samorodov wrote:
>> 17.10.2013 15:19, Marko Cupać пишет:
>>
>>> I cannot compile either of the two with NTLM option enabled:
>>> www/dansguardian
>>> www/dansguardian-devel
>>>
>>> This is on 9.2-RELEASE i386.
>>>
>>> Both fail with the same error message:
>>>
>>> ---- error message ----
>>> checking for NTLM support... yes
>>> checking for iconv... no
>>> no
>>> checking for iconv in -liconv... no
>>> no
>>> checking for libiconv in -liconv... no
>>> configure: error: no native or standard library iconv function found! (needed by NTLM plugin - try again with "--with-libiconv"?)
>>> ===> Script "configure" failed unexpectedly.
>>> ---- error message ----
>>>
>>> Any idea how to fix this?
>>
>> I think that the right way is to include iconv to Uses unconditionally
>> (keeping in mind that --with-libiconv=${LOCALBASE} also was used
>> unconditionally before switching to Uses/iconv.mk). The same for
>> www/dansguardian-devel.
>>
>> The proposed patch attached.
>
> Thanks Boris, feel free to commit it please.
Ok, I have a question though. Should a PORTREVISION be bumped?
The package for 11-x and 10-x won't change, however for 9.x and 8.x
would. I assume that to be on a safe side it's better to bump it.
What do you think? Thanks!
--
WBR, Boris Samorodov (bsam)
FreeBSD Committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?525FDFFE.8050508>