The version of Heimdal in ports (1.5.2) is broken if you try to build it with BDB as backend support. If you set it to not use BDB, it still detects the BDB version in the base FreeBSD OS. This version of Heimdal is incompatible with the version of BDB in the base OS, and this leads to an unusable port in all configurations. This is due to the Makefile using an older configure switch that is no longer valid. A second problem is that if you set it to use BDB as the backend, the port is unable to find the version of BDB installed through dependencies. This is due to another mistake in the Makefile. A third problem is due to the incompatibility with the OS's BDB, if you leave the port configured as default it is unusable. I have corrected this by setting BDB to on as the default. This leaves a usable port if installed with default configure settings. Fix: I have included a patch that fixes all three problems that I have listed. Additionally, it removes a dead mirror from the list of mirrors. Patch attached with submission follows: How-To-Repeat: Try to install and use this port.
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->eadler eadler@ wants his PRs (via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool)
Maintainer of security/heimdal, Please note that PR ports/168214 has just been submitted. If it contains a patch for an upgrade, an enhancement or a bug fix you agree on, reply to this email stating that you approve the patch and a committer will take care of it. The full text of the PR can be found at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168214 -- Edwin Groothuis via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool edwin@FreeBSD.org
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Awaiting maintainers feedback (via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool)
I got some good feedback about this patch. I have made a new one that corrected my missing "\". Also, it was indicated that since this patch is meant to fix a problem, I should not also change the default behavior of the port in the same patch. I've removed that change, so this patch simply fixes the problem of the dead mirror and the problem with configure finding BDB.
Responsible Changed From-To: eadler->wxs Grab from eadler@
On 25.05.2012, at 20:39, Wesley Shields wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:20:46PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:21:54PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 06:29:20PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Wesley Shields = <wxs@freebsd.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> As the person who committed this update I will take = responsibility for >>>>>>>>> seeing this through. Would you mind opening a PR with this = patch and CC >>>>>>>>> both myself and the maintainer so it can be properly tracked. = I will >>>>>>>>> work with both of you to make sure it is addressed. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I got some good feedback about the patch. ?I was missing a "\". = ?Also, >>>>>>>> it was noted that I shouldn't make changes to the default = settings in >>>>>>>> this patch since it is meant to correct a problem. ?I removed = the >>>>>>>> change to default. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I'm not opposed to removing the change to the default, but it = does cause >>>>>>> another problem. See below. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Perhaps the different default is not the best solution. ?Maybe = there >>>>>>>> should be a message that at least one backend is needed for the = port >>>>>>>> to function, but none have been selected by default? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> If a backend is required the port should refuse to build if no = backend >>>>>>> is selected. This is pretty easy to do, just check for at least = one of >>>>>>> the backends. I have no idea if multiple backends can be = supported so >>>>>>> you may or may not want to also check for that. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I may have been too hasty. ?I've thought of a situation where one >>>>>> would want to build the port with no backend at all. ?If one = wanted to >>>>>> use the tools in the port to administrate a remote install of = Heimdal, >>>>>> they may want to build it without a backend. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> My initial thoughts were only for installing the port as a = Heimdal >>>>>> server, and with the --with-berkeley-db=3Dno problem fixed it = does not >>>>>> wrongly find the version of BDB in the base OS. ?With this fix, = the >>>>>> port can function with no backends selected. ?It just won't be = able to >>>>>> function in a server capacity. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I am also not an expert in Heimdal, I just installed it from = source >>>>>> via its own instructions and compared that with what the FreeBSD = port >>>>>> was doing. ?I'd wait for the maintainer to make changes to the = default >>>>>> behavior for the above reason. >>>>>=20 >>>>> This all sounds perfectly reasonable to me. :) >>>>>=20 >>>>> If I'm understanding you correctly the patch[1] in ports/168214 is = the >>>>> correct one to commit. The only change I would make is not bumping >>>>> PORTREVISION since the option is off by default. Sounds like the = only >>>>> thing left to do is wait for maintainer comment on the PR and = commit >>>>> accordingly. >>>>=20 >>>> Sounds good. ?One question: what do you mean by PORTREVISION being = off >>>> by default? >>>=20 >>> There is no need to bump PORTREVISION because the option which you = are >>> changing is off by default so there's no need to force a rebuild of = it >>> on the package cluster since your changes are going to have no = effect >>> there. >>>=20 >>> For those that have the option to on, it hasn't built properly for = them >>> yet so bumping is going to have no effect either. >>=20 >> I understand what you're saying. However, my change would actually >> change the package cluster. Because those packages were built with >> "--without-berkeley-db" rather than "--with-berkeley-db=3Dno" the old >> packages were built with broken BDB support by accident. By fixing >> this, the default package is actually going to be different than the >> one built before this change. I would recommend bumping PORTREVISION >> because of this. >=20 > That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I will be awaiting > maintainer approval or timeout then. Hi, please go ahead and commit and close ports/168214 using the last version = of the patch and please bump PORTREVISION. Sorry for this, i didn't noticed the configure arg change for building = without berkeley-db. Kind regards and thanks Joerg=
wxs 2012-05-26 03:17:17 UTC FreeBSD ports repository Modified files: security/heimdal Makefile Log: Fix build when BDB is selected. PR: ports/168214 Submitted by: Robert Simmons <rsimmons0@gmail.com> Approved by: Joerg Pulz <Joerg.Pulz@frm2.tum.de> (maintainer) Revision Changes Path 1.95 +5 -6 ports/security/heimdal/Makefile _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Committed. Thanks!