Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>