Subject: Re: what's wrong with iconv?
To: Jeremy C. Reed <>
From: Johnny C. Lam <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 03/21/2004 02:19:55
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 04:15:10PM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> If LOCALBASE is X11BASE then the code here in
> mk/buildlink3/ is wrong:
>         case ${BUILDLINK_PREFIX.${_pkg_}} in                            \
>         ${X11BASE})     buildlink_dir="${BUILDLINK_X11_DIR}" ;;         \
>         *)              buildlink_dir="${BUILDLINK_DIR}" ;;             \
>         esac;
> If USE_X11 is set then it is supposed to symlink, but that is never done,
> but the above code snippet sets $dir which is created with mkdir -p
> (MKDIR).

The symlink should always be created if a package sets USE_X11, so
that's the bug the needs to be tracked down.

> This is like my PR pkg/23587 -- I think you should send-pr for buildlink3
> too if this is not already done.

Yes, please send-pr the problem so that it's tracked accurately in
the NetBSD bug database.  pkgsrc doesn't not yet officially support
setting ${LOCALBASE} == ${X11BASE}, but it's a problem that will receive
some attention after the next pkgsrc release.  The patches in pkg/23587
are incomplete in that they solely address the issue of whether or not
${LOCALBASE} == ${X11BASE}, but don't address other possible
relationships between those two directories, and conflict with the
the solution I've designed for the problem.

> I still don't understand the benefit of having two buildlink directories.

This is a holdover from buildlink2 and was to allow the default pkgsrc
setup (USE_XPKGWEDGE=no and ${LOCALBASE} and ${X11BASE} in separate
hierarchies) to work correctly; otherwise, *-config scripts would not
contain any references to X11R6 directories.  This is probably something
that can be done in a better way in buildlink3, but I haven't looked
into the matter yet.


	-- Johnny Lam <>