Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 06:44:16 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 191293] samba41 build fails missing python site-packages Message-ID: <bug-191293-13-5IgA15f6y7@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-191293-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-191293-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191293 Marcus von Appen <mva@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mva@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #2 from Marcus von Appen <mva@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to dewayne from comment #1) > Reverting this patch from two weeks ago > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/Mk/bsd.python. > mk?r1=356221&r2=356921&sortby=date > enabled samba41 to build a package. > > svn update -r "{20140606}" /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk I can't see, how the change should have an impact on samba41. It'd mean that the introduced PYTHON_CONCURRENT_INSTALL flag somehow is triggered by samba's build system in an unexpected way. A test build with samba41, default options, in a 10.x-amd64 poudriere jail did not trigger your bug. I'll test it with a 9.x jail and your set options later. Are you able to try out make clean deinstall package without additional flags being overwritten at the command line? If so, does this trigger the site-package files issue? Are you also able to try a build with the standard options for samba41? Does this trigger the site-package files issue? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-191293-13-5IgA15f6y7>