#3537: [with patch] sage-env should set RM="rm -f"
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  gfurnish  |         Owner:  gfurnish  
     Type:  defect    |        Status:  new       
 Priority:  major     |     Milestone:  sage-4.6.2
Component:  build     |    Resolution:            
 Keywords:            |        Author:  gfurnish  
 Upstream:  N/A       |      Reviewer:            
   Merged:            |   Work_issues:            
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Changes (by newvalueoldvalue):

  * status:  closed => new
  * author:  => gfurnish
 * cc: mabshoff, Snark (added)
  * upstream:  => N/A
  * milestone:  sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix => sage-4.6.2
  * resolution:  wontfix =>


Old description:

> The env variable RM is set to rm instead of rm -rf.  This breaks some
> functionality of make (such as compiling .l files) which breaks the
> ability to compile M2 with sage-env sourced.

New description:

 The env variable RM is set to `rm` instead of `rm -f`. This breaks newer
 libtools, for example anything in Fedora 12 or later (libtool 2.2.6,
 autoconf 2.63, automake 1.11.1). They assume that `$RM` is either unset or
 `RM="rm -f"`, that is, deleting non-existing files must not cause an
 error.

 One of the symptoms of this breakage is that configure ends with
 {{{
 rm: cannot remove `libtoolT': No such file or directory
 }}}
 Compile will break later on...

--

Comment:

 I'm reopening this bug since people keep tripping over this issue. We need
 to fix this or we'll end up with every spkg working around the `RM=rm`
 issue. As the spkg maintainer/author, I know that `cddlib` and `TOPCOM`
 both need to `unset RM` or they won't build. In #10285 it was noted a few
 days ago that Boehm GC 7.2 also trips over this issue. More and more
 packages will fail because of this issue as soon as upsteam re-runs
 autotools...

 For the record, gfurnish's patch applies cleanly on Sage-4.6.1.alpha3
 (apply to the $SAGE_LOCAL/bin repo)

 I'd be happy to give this a positive review. Maybe mabshoff can reconsider
 his objections?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3537#comment:5>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to