On 10/04/12 20:24, Martti Kühne wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:47:35AM +0300, Bogdan Ionuț wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 17:02, David C. Rankin < >> drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 04/07/2012 06:54 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: >>>> Guys, >>>> >>>> After the latest updates, I'm getting a number of package() "make >>> install" >>>> failures on packages that have, until now, packaged just fine. Is >>> anybody else >>>> experiencing this on packages you build? If so, do you know what is >>> causing it >>>> -- and how to fix? I've searched and found that sometimes reordering >>> the link >>>> commands in the Makefile can help, but I can't figure out why things have >>>> packaged just fine up until now and are now failing. Since everything >>> built fine >>>> with the build() command -- why the failure on package()?? >>>> >>>> I've also read another solution is to do away with the .la files >>> completely >>>> and replace with a package config setup. However, before I try and tackle >>>> something like that, I want to figure out what broke. The failures >>> during "make >>>> install" look like this (gwenview and tdegames examples:) >>>> >>>> the failure: >>>> >>>> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ltdeinit_gwenview >>>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status >>>> libtool: install: error: relink `gwenview.la' with the above command >>> before >>>> installing it >>>> >>> >>> All, >>> >>> The answer was provided in an AUR post for spice-gtk: >>> >>> Try editing the PKBUILD in package() >>> >>> make -j1 DESTDIR="$pkgdir/" install >>> >>> It seems that parallel building during package was the culprit. The build >>> of >>> tdegames went fine after adding -j1. >>> >>> -- >>> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. >>> >> >> Or options=(!makeflags) > > Moving thread over here from aur-general, I think -j<something> is a great > makeflag to build a kernel with, but there's no way to tell what packages will > break with the flag. This kind of taints the /etc/makepkg.conf MAKEFLAGS > variable, which is meant as a convenience. I followed the discussion earlier > when someone tried to include a dynamic value for -j into a pkgbuild based on > the number of cpus that could be located. Yeah, I too told him to use > makepkg.conf, which is now under the impression of being a bad idea. > > Ideas? Let the people rot with inserting !makeflags into all PKGBUILDs that > break on their config? >
This has nothing to do with pacman or makepkg. MAKEFLAGS is not a bad idea when the developer of the software you are trying to packages are competent enough to write a Makefile (or use tool that does it for them...). Allan
