Send inn-workers mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of inn-workers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Releasing INN 2.6.0? (Julien ?LIE)
2. Re: Releasing INN 2.6.0? (Julien ?LIE)
3. Circular dependencies between libinnhist and libstorage
(Julien ?LIE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:55:34 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Releasing INN 2.6.0?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Hi Noel,
> My advice, for what it's worth, since its a "major", please consider
> using the -RC way so others may test it before the true final is
> published.
Your advice will be fulfilled as the release process includes a -RC,
even for minor releases. Therefore, there will be a release candidate
version for INN 2.5.5 and for INN 2.6.0.
--
Julien ?LIE
? N'as-tu jamais fait ces r?ves, Neo, qui ont l'air plus vrais que la
r?alit? ? Si tu ?tais incapable de sortir de l'un de ces r?ves,
comment ferais-tu la diff?rence entre le monde du r?ve et le monde
r?el ? ? (Morpheus, _Matrix_)
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:39:30 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Releasing INN 2.6.0?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Hi all,
Do you have preferences for the release planning?
For the last major release, we announced the final release of INN 2.4.6
and a RC for INN 2.5.0 at almost the same time. Then, 3 months later,
we announced the final release of INN 2.5.0.
* Tue Mar 10 04:56:47 UTC 2009 - INN 2.5.0 release candidate available
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/inn-announce/2009-March/000000.html
* Tue Mar 10 20:12:49 UTC 2009 - INN 2.4.6 available
(basically the following day, if we take USA hours)
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/inn-announce/2009-March/000001.html
* Tue Jun 9 03:25:12 UTC 2009 - INN 2.5.0 available
https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/inn-announce/2009-June/000002.html
Maybe we can have INN 2.5.5 and INN 2.6.0 release candidates "now" (just
the time to generate them and make them available at ftp.isc.org).
We announce only the INN 2.6.0 release candidate.
People can play with both the RC.
We'll then see for the final releases depending on the issues people are
facing, if any. Maybe INN 2.5.5 will be ready sooner, and will be
releasable late April.
Then INN 2.6.0 late May or June, to let people time to test.
Another scenario would be to announce the INN 2.6.0 release candidate
only late April, just before the INN 2.5.5 final release.
We would then have only inn-workers testing until late April.
If someone has a clear preference or sees another better scenario,
please share it.
--
Julien ?LIE
? On appelle ?a une insula. C'est une maison o? les gens habitent
les uns au-dessus des autres? ? (Ast?rix)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:37:00 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Circular dependencies between libinnhist and libstorage
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Hi,
I recently tried to build INN 2.6.0 on an Ubuntu VM (12.04.1 LTS)
provided by the GCC C Farm, and found out that the build fails
because of the "$(LIBHIST) $(LIBSTORAGE)" order.
For instance, we currently have in expire/Makefile:
BOTH = $(LIBHIST) $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBINN)
farmuser@ubuntu-1204-amd64:/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/expire$
../libtool --mode=link gcc -o fastrm fastrm.o /scratch../libtool
--mode=link gcc -o fastrm fastrm.o
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/history/libinnhist.la
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/libstorage.la
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/lib/libinn.la
libtool: link: gcc -o .libs/fastrm fastrm.o
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/history/.libs/libinnhist.so
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/.libs/libstorage.so
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/lib/.libs/libinn.so -Wl,-rpath
-Wl,/usr/local/news/lib
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/.libs/libstorage.so: undefined
reference to `HISlookup'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [fastrm] Error 1
Changing the line to:
BOTH = $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBHIST) $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBINN)
does not help for INN 2.6.0 because libtool removes the first libstorage.la!
../libtool --mode=link gcc -o fastrm fastrm.o
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/libstorage.la
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/history/libinnhist.la
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/libstorage.la
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/lib/libinn.la
libtool: link: gcc -o .libs/fastrm fastrm.o
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/history/.libs/libinnhist.so
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/.libs/libstorage.so
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/lib/.libs/libinn.so -Wl,-rpath
-Wl,/usr/local/news/lib
/scratch/iulius/inn-CURRENT-20150322/storage/.libs/libstorage.so: undefined
reference to `HISlookup'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [fastrm] Error 1
However, the build is OK with:
BOTH = $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBHIST) $(LIBINN)
I hope this new order is fine.
Russ, you seem to remember cases where $(LIBSTORAGE)
should be after $(LIBHIST); does it only concern backends?
Note that we no longer have $(LIBSTORAGE) listed twice in
backends/Makefile for INN 2.6.0. Does that sound OK now that
Libtool is unconditionally used?
(I do not see errors on other servers of the GCC C Farm.)
--
Julien ?LIE
Le 24/09/2014 04:53, INN Commit a ?crit :
>
> Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 @ 19:53:29
> Author: eagle
> Revision: 9720
>
> Re-add second $(LIBSTORAGE) when linking backends
>
> Backend commands (such as nntpget) linked with both history
> and storage libraries list $(LIBSTORAGE) in the link line twice.
> This isn't a mistake; there are some unfortunate circular
> dependencies that require listing $(LIBSTORAGE) both before
> and after $(LIBINNHIST) in the link line or static linking will
> fail.
>
> Modified:
> branches/2.5/backends/Makefile
>
> ----------+
> Makefile | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Modified: Makefile
> ===================================================================
> --- Makefile 2014-09-22 19:19:40 UTC (rev 9719)
> +++ Makefile 2014-09-24 02:53:29 UTC (rev 9720)
> @@ -71,7 +71,9 @@
>
> ## Compilation rules.
>
> -BOTH = $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBHIST) $(LIBINN)
> +# $(LIBSTORAGE) must be listed twice to resolve circular dependencies
> +# when doing static linking.
> +BOTH = $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBHIST) $(LIBSTORAGE) $(LIBINN)
>
> LINK = $(LIBLD) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@
> INNLIBS = $(LIBINN) $(LIBS)
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
inn-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
End of inn-workers Digest, Vol 70, Issue 7
******************************************
