Re: Handling one-off build failures

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Kevin Bloom <ktnb%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:

> I'm currently using a CRUX Linux system for some work stuff and
> I'm using pkgsrc as the package manager for it. While attempting
> to get a few things setup I ran into a PLIST error for
> x11/xlockmore[-lite]. There was a missing executable, namely,
> xmlock. I've never seen this before and have been using xlock for
> a long time. Regardless, I checked the bulk builds to see if it
> was failing on those but none of the linux bulk builds seem to fail
> because of this.
>
> Is this something that I should just leave as-is or is there some
> way to handle this edge case?

Don't think "PLIST error".  Think "my build didn't installed a file that
is installed in other people's builds" and perhaps "luckily, the PLIST
scheme caught this".

The questions are

  what is xmlock?

  why would one want it or not want it?

  how does the upstream autoconf/makefile/etc. decide to build or not
  build it?

  what is different about your system than other linux?*

  do you need a dependency to be expressed, that the other systems
  happen to have anyway?


* Keep in mind that pkgsrc says "Linux", But Linux is a kernel and there
  are a vast number of GNU/Linux operating systems, each a little
  different.  So far we're getting away with this, and it would be
  painful to stop trying to pretend Linux is an OS.