Subject: Re: pkgsrc Linux 2.6.12-10-amd64-xeon/x86_64 bulk build results 20060724.1458
To: Perry E.Metzger <perry@piermont.com>
From: Min Sik Kim <minskim@NetBSD.org>
List: pkgsrc-bulk
Date: 08/13/2006 07:20:50
On Jul 30, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
> Min Sik Kim <minskim@NetBSD.org> writes:
>> On Jul 30, 2006, at 4:52 AM, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>>>
>>> Min Sik Kim <minskim@NetBSD.org> writes:
>>>> On Jul 27, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
>>>>>> lang/clisp                 2       pkgsrc-users@NetBSD.org
>>>>>
>>>>> ERROR:         /home/msk/pkg/share/doc/clisp/clisp.pdf
>>>>
>>>> clisp.pdf was not generated during the build because there was no
>>>> tool to convert .dvi to .pdf.  The configure script looked for
>>>> "dvipdf" and failed.  Should depend on another package for such a
>>>> tool.
>>>
>>> Or alternatively, we should remove the test in the configure script.
>>
>> As long as the package can discover the right tool to generate PDF,
>> I'm fine with it.
>
> So what should we do, just add a dependency on ghostscript-gnu? (That
> seems to be where dvipdf lives.)

Now dvipdf is available as a tool.  "USE_TOOLS+=dvipdf" will take  
care of the dependency.

>
>>>> Another problem with clisp is that it cannot be built by a non-root
>>>> user, because it runs "install" to change ownership during the
>>>> "build" stage.  The error message is as follows:
>>>>
>>>> /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g  
>>>> root
>>>> -m 444 libcharset.la /usr/pkgsrc/lang/clisp/work/clisp-2.39/src/
>>>> libcharset.la
>>>> /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g root -m 444
>>>> .libs/libcharset.so. 1.0.0 /
>>>> usr/pkgsrc/lang/clisp/work/clisp-2.39/src/libcharset.so.1.0.0
>>>> /usr/bin/install: cannot change ownership of `/usr/pkgsrc/lang/ 
>>>> clisp/
>>>> work/clisp-2.39/src/libcharset.so.1.0.0': Operation not permitted
>>>> *** Error code 1
>>>
>>> I know, but it was like that before I last touched it. Do you have
>>> suggestions on fixing it?
>>
>> Not sure why it installs libcharset, but maybe it can use converters/
>> libiconv's libcharset instead?
>
> I feel like it is safer using the supplied one. Either way, would it
> be safe to just patch it so the install isn't done with a chown?

I think so.

Regards,
Min