Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:39:29 -0200
From:      Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        gnome@FreeBSD.org,  perl@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: libperl stage-qa check and libraries that do not link against libperl.so
Message-ID:  <86twmayboe.fsf@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <C3873737817287E61167F372@ogg.in.absolight.net> (Mathieu Arnold's message of "Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:34:56 %2B0100")
References:  <86d1t0nu6x.fsf@FreeBSD.org> <83298B9CC954C7F5642168D0@atuin.in.mat.cc> <868u3nonxn.fsf@FreeBSD.org> <880733D886684E0C0D43E7D8@atuin.in.mat.cc> <8637tvyzpe.fsf@FreeBSD.org> <1927902E41BBF231A0EF6A54@ogg.in.absolight.net> <C3873737817287E61167F372@ogg.in.absolight.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> writes:

> tl;dr:
>
> The qa script work as intented, it caught some software doing something
> stupid.

OK, thanks for checking this.

I've sent https://github.com/libproxy/libproxy/pull/7 to get this
changed upstream.

> +--On 18 janvier 2016 16:18:40 +0100 Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> | 
> | 
> | +--On 18 janvier 2016 08:00:29 -0200 Raphael Kubo da Costa
> | <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> || Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> || 
> ||> +--On 17 janvier 2016 23:12:36 +0100 Raphael Kubo da Costa
> ||> <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> ||> |> For these, if the non-linking is intentional, and not needed,
> ||> |> ignore the ***WARNING***.
> ||> | 
> ||> | Right. If linking against libperl.so and not linking against it are
> ||> | both fine, does it still make sense to have that stage-qa check?
> ||> 
> ||> There is a stage-qa check because if you link against libperl.so, you
> ||> MUST have rpath set to the path of libperl.so, it happens if the port is
> ||> doing what Perl should be doing and getting it wrong.  Also, sometime,
> ||> you don't link with libperl.so, and it's a mistake, and it should be.
> ||> 
> ||> There are a few cases where it's not needed, but when I added the qa
> ||> check when I changed libperl.so to be versionned, out of all the ports
> ||> that install .so in PERL_ARCH, there were, say, 3 or 4 that had a .so
> ||> that did not need to be linked with libperl.so.
> || 
> || How about making the "not linked with libperl.so.x.y" warning non-fatal
> || then? Right now I cannot just ignore it as suggested because it makes
> || the script exit with a non-zero error code.
> | 
> | I just had a look at the commit, and the qa script is right.  The author
> | is wrong, the .so contains Perl code and must be linked with libperl.so.
> | It must be linked with it so that when the major Perl version is changed
> | (like 5.20 -> 5.22 that is happening soon(tm)) the link allows pkg to
> | know that the package needs to be reinstalled so that it continues to
> | work.
> | 
> || While here: there's a FIXME comment in this part that talks about
> || changing the linkage detection logic, but it does not specify what
> || should be changed. Do you have more information? I could try to fix both
> || issues and send a patch for review.
> | 
> | I forgot about the FIXME. It works as intented right now, I'll have a look
> | at it later.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86twmayboe.fsf>