Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-19 Thread Martin Simmons
 On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:12:43 -0500, Dan Langille said:
 
 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.

Perhaps the port's Makefile can be changed to use Bacula's make install like
bacula-bat.spec does for the rpms?  That must be better than adding more
hacks...

__Martin

--
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-18 Thread Martin Simmons
 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.

It then builds the package from the installed files, so again there should be
no .libs directory.

__Martin

--
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-18 Thread Dan Langille
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-17 Thread Martin Simmons
 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.

__Martin

--
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-17 Thread Dan Langille
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.

--
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-16 Thread Martin Simmons
 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).

__Martin

--
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


Re: [Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-16 Thread Dan Langille
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?

--
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


[Bacula-users] after building bat, location of binary varies

2009-11-15 Thread Dan Langille
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.

Where does this binary appear during your build?

What OS?

What version of QT?

Me?

src/qt-console/bat
FreeBSD 8.0


--
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