1 |
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 08:16:47 -0400, |
2 |
Jack wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> On 6/13/19 5:47 AM, John Covici wrote: |
5 |
> > Hi. I use inn to fetch/post usenet news. I know its no longer in the |
6 |
> > tree, but I would like to keep it going. The last version in the tree |
7 |
> > 2.5.5-r1 no longer configures, so I wrote an ebuild similar to the |
8 |
> > ones that used to be there which I copied to my local ebuilds for |
9 |
> > 2.6.3. This configures and compiles fine, but gets linking errors |
10 |
> > where it cannot find symbol HISTLOOKUP. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> You need to track down where HISTLOOKUP should be coming from, |
13 |
> and then why in isn't finding it, but didn't miss it at |
14 |
> configure/compile. Do "ldd /path/to/inn" to see if there is a |
15 |
> library it can't find. If it finds everything, then perhaps it |
16 |
> needs a newer version of whichever dependency includes (or is |
17 |
> supposed to include) that symbol. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> You can also compare that ldd output to "ldd |
20 |
> /path/to/inn/from/tarball". If there is any difference, then |
21 |
> perhaps your ebuild is missing something in the ./configure |
22 |
> command. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> > Now what is strange is if I just get the tarball and configure with |
25 |
> > the same parameters and compile out of tree, it works fine -- at least |
26 |
> > up to the point of make install. I would like to do things in such a |
27 |
> > way that portage knows its there in case there is a preserved lib or |
28 |
> > something that I need to take care of. I could not figure what the |
29 |
> > difference is as to why the ebuild does not work and my out of tree |
30 |
> > compile works, so it looks like I have two choices: |
31 |
> > |
32 |
> > 1. unmerge and just maintain the out of tree build or |
33 |
> > 2. Leave it there and just do a make update which copies the binaries |
34 |
> > over the old ones. If I do number 2, it might be impossible to go to |
35 |
> > the 17.1 profile, so I am of two minds about this. |
36 |
> > |
37 |
> > If anyone has any insight into this I would appreciate it very much. |
38 |
> > |
39 |
> > Thanks. |
40 |
|
41 |
It looks like the symbol is in one of the libraries compiled with the |
42 |
build, and this is what is so strange. I saw a post that talked about |
43 |
the order of the libraries in the link command, but it looks the same |
44 |
in ebuild and the tarball build. I configured the tarball using the |
45 |
configure line in the log from the ebuild, so that should be the same. |
46 |
|
47 |
|
48 |
-- |
49 |
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: |
50 |
How do |
51 |
you spend it? |
52 |
|
53 |
John Covici wb2una |
54 |
covici@××××××××××.com |