Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:11:24 +0100 From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/63306: [MAINTAINER] databases/db42: add patch.4.2.52.2 Message-ID: <403B5B8C.7040702@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <20040224135906.GG6451@merlin.emma.line.org> References: <200402241327.i1ODRigf036524@freefall.freebsd.org> <20040224135906.GG6451@merlin.emma.line.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthias Andree wrote: > USE_LIBTOOL does not work for this port, as is documented, > Makefile.db mentions: > > # Do not use GNU_CONFIGURE or USE_LIBTOOL, it adds a --prefix option > # we do not want in CONFIGURE_ARGS, and currently (2003-12-09) breaks > # with its non-standard ${CONFIGURE_SCRIPT}. CONFIGURE_SCRIPT is configure, this seems standard to me. The --prefix seems reasonable too, even though it should be overridable. Do you have a patch for this? > The .la file situation isn't at all clear either. The porter's handbook > doesn't mention anything, and a ports@ query a few weeks ago just led to > general shrugging. One person didn't need it, the next one did, so I'll > choose whatever the upstream does to meet applications' expectations. portlint should be considered an authority here. > If you want ports to USE_LIBTOOL, first make sure that GNU_CONFIGURE and > CONFIGURE_SCRIPT can work together. Usually they do. What exactly is the problem there, e.g. what are you trying to do?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?403B5B8C.7040702>