Re: LFS vs procfs on SunOS

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 11:32:48AM +0100, Filip Hajny wrote:
 > there are some packages which fail on SunOS (unless ABI=64),
 > because they try to have both large file support and
 > procfs. However, the procfs headers on SunOS are in a deliberate
 > conflict with LFS. Sometimes the procfs requirement can be dropped
 > using a patch or CONFIGURE_ENV, or _FILE_OFFSET_BITS can be
 > undefined, but I'm unsure about the validity of either.
 > 
 > Examples are print/cups (discovers and tries to use ucred.h, which
 > pulls in procfs) and net/nagios-plugins (the swap plugin looks for
 > procfs).
 > 
 > Should the package just hard fail in such case (e.g. if ABI not set
 > to 64 on SunOS), or should one try to work around at risk of
 > limited functionality? What'd be the best practice under pkgsrc?

Can you explain *why* it's deliberately broken? Is it because their
kernel procfs code is bollocks and needs to be kept in a padded cell,
or is it some kind of library/headers management issue? Or is it just
Sun being deliberately difficult to discourage use of 32-bit code
and/or large files?

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost