On May 1, 2010, at 5:53 AM, Panagiotis Christias <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Dan Langille <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 4/28/2010 5:05 PM, Martin Simmons wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:46:22 -0400, Steve Polyack said: >>>> >>>> On 04/28/10 14:15, Kern Sibbald wrote: >>>>> I suspect that is something that we have seen before. If you >>>>> explicitly add >>>>> libraries (I suspect that you did, because Linker flags is set, >>>>> which is >>>>> not "normal"), Bacula could then link against previously >>>>> installed libraries >>>>> rather than its own library that it has just built, and you will >>>>> get errors. >>>>> >>>>> Either don't use any Linker flags (as you have done), or >>>>> deinstall the old >>>>> Bacula and its shared libraries prior to building, or point >>>>> linker flags to >>>>> the Bacula build src/lib directory before pointing it to a >>>>> directory where a >>>>> previous version of Bacula is installed (in your case /usr/local/ >>>>> lib. >>>>> >>>> This is indeed the problem. I don't think that deinstalling the >>>> older >>>> version of bacula first is a proper solution, though. I like the >>>> idea >>>> of changing the order of the linker paths, however, I can't seem >>>> to find >>>> where LDFLAGS is getting set. I think it's getting set by the >>>> configure >>>> script, but I may be wrong. (It's set in the port Makefile, but >>>> removing this declaration doesn't prevent it from getting set >>>> elsewhere.) >>> >>> It must be set, so the linker can find other dependencies such as >>> libpq that >>> are always in /usr/local/lib on FreeBSD. >>> >>> I think there are two solutions for the port: >>> >>> 1) Put the libbac files in a private directory such as /usr/local/ >>> bacula/lib, >>> which will not be on the linker path during make. Libtool >>> takes care of >>> relinking during make install. This is how it works in the >>> "recommended" >>> installation, which uses a separate directory for the whole of >>> Bacula. >>> >>> 2) Turn off the shared libbac support with --disable-libtool. >>> That will waste >>> a few MB of disk space and memory but doesn't seem to cause >>> any other >>> problems. >> >> FYI, whatever works is fine by me. >> >> I won't be able to make progress on this until June. > > That means no bacula port update for FreeBSD till then? Others are welcome to create it. But I traveling and occupied with BSDCan and PGCon. -- Dan Langille http://langille.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
