ports/mail/dbmail-devel fails to build because it cannot find LOCALBASE/lib. I tried commenting out LDAP support and it simply cascaded down to libseive failing to be found. Fix: in ports/mail/dbmail-devel/Makefile:37 change CFLAGS+= -fPIC -I${LOCALBASE}/include to CFLAGS+= -fPIC -I${LOCALBASE}/include -L${LOCALBASE}/lib And the port will compile. How-To-Repeat: build ports/mail/dbmail-devel: ===> Found saved configuration for dbmail-2.1.7 ===> Extracting for dbmail-2.1.7 => MD5 Checksum OK for dbmail-2.1.7.tar.gz. => SHA256 Checksum OK for dbmail-2.1.7.tar.gz. ===> Patching for dbmail-2.1.7 ===> Applying FreeBSD patches for dbmail-2.1.7 /usr/bin/sed -e 's|%%DATADIR%%|/usr/local/share/dbmail|g' /mnt/disk0/usr.ports/mail/dbmail-devel/pkg-message > /mnt/disk0/usr.ports/mail/dbmail-devel/work/pkg-message ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on executable in : gmake - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on file: /usr/local/bin/libtool - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on executable in : pkg-config - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on shared library: gmime-2.0.4 - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on shared library: sieve.1 - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on shared library: ldap-2.3.2 - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on shared library: mysqlclient.14 - found ===> dbmail-2.1.7 depends on shared library: glib-2.0.0 - found ===> Configuring for dbmail-2.1.7 This is dbmail's GNU configure script. It's going to run a bunch of strange tests to hopefully make your compile work without much twiddling. checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g wheel checking whether build environment is sane... yes checking for gawk... no checking for mawk... no checking for nawk... nawk checking whether gmake sets $(MAKE)... yes checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no checking for mysql_config... /usr/local/bin/mysql_config checking MySQL headers... -I/usr/local/include/mysql -O -pipe -msse -march=athlon-xp -march=athlon-xp checking MySQL libraries... -rpath=/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib -L/usr/local/lib/mysql -lmysqlclient -lz -lcrypt -lm -L/usr/lib -lssl -lcrypto checking for authentication configuration using LDAP authentication checking for ldap.h (user supplied)... /usr/local/include/ldap.h checking for style of include used by gmake... GNU checking for gcc... cc checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out checking whether the C compiler works... yes checking whether we are cross compiling... no checking for suffix of executables... checking for suffix of object files... o checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes checking whether cc accepts -g... yes checking for cc option to accept ANSI C... none needed checking dependency style of cc... gcc3 checking for ldap_bind in -lldap... no configure: error: Unable to link against ldap. It appears you are missing the development libraries or they aren't in your linker's path ===> Script "configure" failed unexpectedly. Please report the problem to mark_sf@kikg.ifmo.ru [maintainer] and attach the "/mnt/disk0/usr.ports/mail/dbmail-devel/work/dbmail-2.1.7/config.log" including the output of the failure of your make command. Also, it might be a good idea to provide an overview of all packages installed on your system (e.g. an `ls /var/db/pkg`). *** Error code 1 Stop in /mnt/disk0/usr.ports/mail/dbmail-devel. Exit 1
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Awaiting maintainers feedback
Offered fix is ok.
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->stefan Take.
Hi, I noticed that the plist contains a couple of "PORTNAME"s too many, which leads to share/PORTNAME/dbmail/... being created when installing dbmail-devel from a precompiled package. Actually, explicitly creating the directories doesn't seem to be necessary at all. Attached is a patch that removes the lines that contain "@exec mkdir ..." and replaces occurrences of "share/%%PORTNAME%%" with "%%DATADIR%%"; it also incorporates the change to the Makefile proposed by Chris. Mark, please let me know if you have any objections regarding these changes. Regards, Stefan
Mark Starovoytov, 15.08.06, 02:05h CEST: > SW> Mark, please let me know if you have any objections regarding these > SW> changes. > > No objections at all. OK. > But portrevision doesn't need to be enlarged, IMHO, because there are no big > changes to port. IMHO, plist changes should always be reflected in PORTREVISION; IIRC it enforces the official package being rebuilt on the ports building cluster, and I think that's wanted in this case. Regards, Stefan
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Committed, thanks!