Subject: Re: misc/rpm build breakage on -current
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
From: Johnny C. Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/29/2007 20:34:01
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 03:59:46PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 09:41:40PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > Hi!
> > misc/rpm doesn't currently build on NetBSD-4.99.20/amd64 from
> > today. It fails with:
> > cc -o rpm -static rpm.o query.o install.o verify.o checksig.o ftp.o url.o build.o -L/usr/pkg/lib -Wl,-R/usr/pkg/lib -L/usr/lib -Wl,-R/usr/lib -L/usr/obj/misc/rpm/work.x86_64/rpm-2.5.4/lib -L/usr/obj/misc/rpm/work.x86_64/rpm-2.5.4/build -L/usr/obj/misc/rpm/work.x86_64/rpm-2.5.4/misc -lrpmbuild -lpopt -lrpm -lmisc -lintl -lz
> The problem is the -static. Our static library format doesn't support inter-
> library dependencies, so you don't get the dependency from libssp to libz.
> Is there a reason this compilation needs -static? The simplest fix is to
> just remove it.
For misc/rpm, we should definitely remove the -static flag. The only
reason for it seems to be that the authors wanted the rpm binary to
not depend on any shared libraries that may be managed through RPM.
As this is pkgsrc, we don't care about using RPM to manage our packages.
Offhand, I don't know how many other packages compile things with
-static. I'm not how widespread this problem may be until we do a
pkgsrc bulk build.
-- Johnny Lam <email@example.com>