Martin Simmons wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:45:51 -0500, Dan Langille said: >> Martin Simmons wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:32:56 -0500, Dan Langille said: >>>> Martin Simmons wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 23:45:43 -0500, Dan Langille said: >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am finding that the location of the executable binary varies from one >>>>>> system to another. I am trying to find out why. The answer will help >>>>>> to improve the build and install process. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sometimes the binary is at: >>>>>> >>>>>> src/qt-console/bat >>>>>> >>>>>> If not there, it is at: >>>>>> >>>>>> src/qt-console/.libs/bat >>>>>> >>>>>> Within a given system, the location is always consistent. It is one of >>>>>> the above. Why the location varies, I do not know. >>>>> The .libs directory is the default location when building with libtool >>>>> (for >>>>> Bacula shared libraries). >>>> This is interesting. Please, can you elaborate? >>> The libtool utility is a wrapper around compiling/linking/install to deal >>> with >>> portability for shared library naming. >>> >>> In the build tree, it puts all shared libraries and executables into >>> subdirectories which are called .libs by default. It also creates a shell >>> script for each executable, which sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriately to make >>> it work in the build tree. >>> >>> Note that this is only in the build tree. During "make install", it >>> installs >>> the real libraries and binaries. >>> >>> My guess is that that some are not being linked with shared libraries for >>> some >>> reason, so Bacula is not using libtool and the real executable is built in >>> src/qt-console/bat. >>> >>> It isn't clear to me why the location of the binaries matters, unless the >>> Makefile is broken. >> It matters because building the FreeBSD port/packages needs to know >> where the binary is. Without knowing, you can't install it or build it >> into a package. > > OK, but I don't understand why. > > Normally, a port's Makefile (or bsd.port.mk) installs the software by running > make install with the software's Makefile. The installed location should > never have a .libs directory (it should only exist in the build tree). If the > installed location has a .libs directory, then the software's Makefile is > broken.
Yes, that is the normal situation. However, for sysutils/bacula-bat, the bat file is installed by the port's Makefile. I do not know why. That's how it's done. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users