DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > FreeBSD > FreeBSD Ports and Packages

FreeBSD Ports and Packages Installation and upgrading of ports and packages on FreeBSD.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 24th March 2009
indiocolifa indiocolifa is offline
Real Name: Hernán Di Pietro
UnixUser
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: La Plata
Posts: 17
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Switch linuxbase for porting software

I'm currently the mantainer of graphics/linux-ac3d port. My problem is that in the last ac3d version, the executable needs GLIBC 2.4, while the default fc4 linuxbase has 2.3.6 installed. I didn't find ports using newer (2.6.16) linuxbase ports, how this must be handled? Should I use the LINUX_BASE=f8 and OSRELEASE=2.6.16 options in the ports Makefile and switch linuxbase to f8 to test?

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 24th March 2009
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,075
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

The best solution would be if the vendor would either statically compile the binary or supply the required shared libraries.

You can try requesting this, I suspect the request won't be answered ... I guess creating a new devel/linux-glibc2.4 is the best solution then (Surprised it doesn't already exists actually).
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 24th March 2009
indiocolifa indiocolifa is offline
Real Name: Hernán Di Pietro
UnixUser
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: La Plata
Posts: 17
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker View Post
The best solution would be if the vendor would either statically compile the binary or supply the required shared libraries.

You can try requesting this, I suspect the request won't be answered ... I guess creating a new devel/linux-glibc2.4 is the best solution then (Surprised it doesn't already exists actually).
Thank you for your response!

1) Vendor does not actually support FreeBSD I think, but maybe I should ask for statically compiled binaries. I think this is not going to happen, like you say.

2) Linux LibC's are builtin on the linuxbase packages, of course. No devel/linux-glibc2.4 available...

3) I should try using linuxbase-fc8 and see what happens or take an example of a port requiring libc > 2.3.6, if I can find one (googleearth?)

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 24th March 2009
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,075
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Quote:
Vendor does not actually support FreeBSD I think
This doesn't really matter, it will make things easier for Linux users too.

Quote:
2) Linux LibC's are builtin on the linuxbase packages, of course. No devel/linux-glibc2.4 available...
I know, but you can create one, as long as it doesn't conflict with the existing linux-base ports ...

Quote:
3) I should try using linuxbase-fc8 and see what happens or take an example of a port requiring libc > 2.3.6, if I can find one (googleearth?)
That's always a good idea, no need to reinvent the wheel.

However, running
% find /usr/ports -type d -and -name linux-\* -exec grep -H glibc "{}/Makefile" \;
Doesn't seem to turn up anything ...
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 25th March 2009
indiocolifa indiocolifa is offline
Real Name: Hernán Di Pietro
UnixUser
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: La Plata
Posts: 17
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Solved Thanks! Port update committed.
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 28th March 2009
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,075
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

So newer linux base does have glibc 2.4? I am curious why setting LINUXBASE to f8 didn't work before then? i.e. What did you do to fix it?
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 28th March 2009
indiocolifa indiocolifa is offline
Real Name: Hernán Di Pietro
UnixUser
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: La Plata
Posts: 17
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I manually installed Linuxbase-f8 and set osrelease sysctl to 2.6.16. Using this linuxbase, the port worked.

Actually, f8 has glibc 2.7.x I think.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
switch user Gnome and FreeBSD mfaridi FreeBSD General 2 30th September 2008 07:38 AM
Trouble with ZFS switch dewarrn1 FreeBSD General 2 11th September 2008 11:58 PM
USB KVM switch logfile mess crayoxide General Hardware 1 15th August 2008 06:23 PM
porting gnome got samba error. bsdnewbie999 OpenBSD General 2 19th June 2008 02:06 AM
Porting Firefox to qt - progress? caesius FreeBSD Ports and Packages 9 5th June 2008 11:13 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick