Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:03:40 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Apache_fp Port install problem Message-ID: <20030112120340.GB42913@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophi> In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20030111120144.01232f58@mail.sage-one.net> References: <3.0.5.32.20030111113122.01232f58@mail.sage-one.net> <3.0.5.32.20030111113122.01232f58@mail.sage-one.net> <3.0.5.32.20030111120144.01232f58@mail.sage-one.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 12:01:44PM -0600, Jack L. Stone wrote:
> At 05:44 PM 1.11.2003 +0000, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 11:31:22AM -0600, Jack L. Stone wrote:
> >> I just updated from FBSD-4.5 to 4.7 on a server running apache_fp.1.26. The
> >> update somehow has broken the FP extensions (ugh!). I have tried a number
> >> of fixes, including portupgrade, but get a checksum error there. Have tried
> >> to rerun the present install of FP using fp_install.sh, but get this error:
> >> Who should own web root web on port 80 [www]:
> >> What should the group for web root web on port 80 be [www]:
> >> /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: /usr/lib/libm.so.2: Undefined symbol "__stderrp"
> >> ERROR: Unable to chown web root web in port 80
> >> Hit enter to continue
> >>
> >> I'm also seeing the "__stderrp" error in my httpd-error.log whenever I try
> >> to login to FP. So, something has changed in the FBSD-4.5-4.7 update and
> >> I've never seen this error, so don't know what needs to be fixed. I have
> >> another server running apache_fp.1.27 on FBSD.4.7 just fine.
> >>
> >> It's looking like an uninstall/reinstall completely for apache+fp....
> >> didn't want to have to do that on a box with a bunch of virtual hosts.....
> >>
> >> Has anyone seen the above problem on similar installs...???
> >
> >/usr/src/UPDATING says:
> >
> >20021110:
> > The definitions of the standard file streams (stdio, stdout, and
> > stderr) have changed so that they are no longer compile-time
> > constants. Some older binaries may require updated 3.X
> > compatability libraries (for example, by setting COMPAT3X=yes
> > for a buildworld/installworld).
> >
> >Alternatively to doing a buildworld with COMPAT3X=yes, you could
> >install the misc/compat3x port.
> Good grief! I read the UPDATING as always, but this one did NOT sink
> in....! Thank you so much for pointing me in the right direction before I
> shot myself in the foot....
>
> If I go the misc/compat3x port route, I assume I need to redo the
> buildword....?? If so, then I might as well include the COMPAT3X=yes in the
> make.conf.
All that setting COMPAT3X=yes does is cause the buildworld process to
uudecode and install some precompiled copies of FreeBSD-3.x shared
libraries --- see /usr/src/lib/compat/compat3x.i386 for what's
available. Those libraries were originally just copied off a 3.x
machine, but since then kernel changes in 4.x or 5.0 have meant that
certain changes have had to be back ported to RELENG_3 in order to
maintain compatibility between the 3.x shlibs and the kernel.
Supplying those libraries by installing the port achieves exactly the
same effect, but quicker. However, the choice is entirely up to you.
In the long run, putting COMPAT3X into /etc/make.conf would be my
choice, as my regular schedule of buildworlds would ensure everything
was up to date.
Once the 3.x shlibs are in place, the binary frontpage binary supplied
with the apache-fp port should pick them up OK. The interface between
the 3.x shlibs and any applications linked to them should remain
exactly the same.
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks
Savill Way
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow
Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030112120340.GB42913>