| 1 |
Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 01:00:06 -0500, reader@×××××××.com wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I'm trying to make my own ebuild of samba, jumping to latest release |
| 6 |
>> 23c. After creating the overlay and moving the current 23a there |
| 7 |
>> renamed as 23c. I'd like to make ebuild use one custom ./conifigure |
| 8 |
>> arg of my own creation. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> There are two ways of doing this: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Modify the ebuild, adding |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> --without-torture \ |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> to the list that follows "econf" in src_compile(), line 95 in the |
| 17 |
> 3.0.23a ebuild. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Set the EXTRA_ECONF variable |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> EXTRA_ECONF="--without-torture" emerge samba |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Thanks for the detailed help, I think I must be going at this the |
| 24 |
wrong way and should maybe be trying to figure out why `torture' is |
| 25 |
breaking rather than trying to by-pass it. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The configure still fails after adding |
| 28 |
--without-torture \ |
| 29 |
as suggested under the `econf' section. The the last chunk of |
| 30 |
compiler output is at the end of this message. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
It appears identical to the ouput I got with my first attempt at |
| 33 |
making an ebuild, so I'm guessing --without-torture is not really a |
| 34 |
possible flag as it appears to be breaking on torture any way. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I see some lines futher down below the econf section, around line 127 |
| 37 |
where the script runs `make torture' so --without-torture doesn't do |
| 38 |
it I guess. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I've tried commenting those two line out: |
| 41 |
# einfo "make rpctorture" |
| 42 |
# emake rpctorture || ewarn "rpctorture didn't build" |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
But then the verification fails on the ebuild `unpack' part: |
| 45 |
[...] |
| 46 |
!!! Digest verification failed: |
| 47 |
!!! /usr/local/portage/net-fs/samba/samba-3.0.23c.ebuild |
| 48 |
!!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size |
| 49 |
!!! Got: 8233 |
| 50 |
!!! Expected: 8230 |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
So how can I edit this script and get around that failure? And why |
| 53 |
didn't it fail verification when I inserted --withoug-toruture? |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
That would have changed the md5 too. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Or is it something I can correct by just generating my own post edit |
| 58 |
md5 checksum? |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
-- |
| 63 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives