Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Just an addendum to the issue Cliff encountered with PHP. This was traced down to a minor abnormality in autoconf-2.50 which apparently was eliminated in later versions. I've committed a workaround for that. Case closed. - Sascha Experience IRCG http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Two concerns: 1) libtool 1.4.2 fails on HP-UX. One of the Apache tarballs was created with libtool 1.4.2 but it didn't work on HP-UX. Maybe 1.4.x works on HP-UX. Madhu Mathihalli mentioned to me off-line yesterday that there was a problem with 1.4.2 on HP-UX with its use of temporary files. He was going to look further. 2) Don't be surprised if libtool doesn't properly support this feature everywhere (e.g., AIX). Isn't this what we found was broken with libtool 1.4.2 on AIX? If somebody has a patch, I'm willing to try it on AIX and HP-UX. I see that Justin has posted a patch to use the dependencies. I'll try to test it soon-ish (hopefully tonight) to make sure it doesn't mess up an Apache build on AIX. -- Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Subversion has been on libtool 1.4 since last October. After some initial grumbling, there hasn't been *any* problem with people complaining about not having libtool 1.4 available. I think it would simplify our life, and give us proper dependencies, yet not cause any undue burden (libtool 1.4 has been out for a long while now...) From IRC, I already have a +1 from Justin and Sander. So I'd say we have enough positive traction for the move. But does anybody see any *problems* or have a reason to *not* require 1.4 ? +1 on MacOS/X LibTool needs to be upgraded anyway to fix some bugs with the one shipped with the OS, and 1.4.2 (patched) runs just fine... Pier
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
From IRC, I already have a +1 from Justin and Sander. So I'd say we have enough positive traction for the move. But does anybody see any *problems* or have a reason to *not* require 1.4 ? PHP has required 1.4.x for months and our latest distributions are based on it; no problems so far. - Sascha Experience IRCG http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Two concerns: 1) libtool 1.4.2 fails on HP-UX. One of the Apache tarballs was created with libtool 1.4.2 but it didn't work on HP-UX. Maybe 1.4.x works on HP-UX. 2) Don't be surprised if libtool doesn't properly support this feature everywhere (e.g., AIX). Isn't this what we found was broken with libtool 1.4.2 on AIX? If somebody has a patch, I'm willing to try it on AIX and HP-UX. -- Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Are there any platforms do _not_ support libtool 1.4 or have problems with it? What about specific versions of 1.4 (like 1.4.2 on AIX for example)? If so, I don't want to get in to the version nightmare that projects like PHP have gotten themselves in to. OTOH, if we can minimize the problems that certain platforms have with 1.4, then I am a big +1 for this. -aaron
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Are there any platforms do _not_ support libtool 1.4 or have problems with it? What about specific versions of 1.4 (like 1.4.2 on AIX for example)? If so, I don't want to get in to the version nightmare that projects like PHP have gotten themselves in to. OTOH, if we can minimize Could you elaborate? - Sascha Experience IRCG http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Are there any platforms do _not_ support libtool 1.4 or have problems with it? What about specific versions of 1.4 (like 1.4.2 on AIX for example)? If so, I don't want to get in to the version nightmare that projects like PHP have gotten themselves in to. OTOH, if we can minimize Could you elaborate? PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool, autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is up with your slackware?). I've run configure and had it produce what seemed like a perfect run, only to realize that it didn't produce any Makefiles. Very strange. I like how apache *always* runs buildconf w/o failure on all my machines, regardless of autoconf/libtool versions. -aaron
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Two concerns: 1) libtool 1.4.2 fails on HP-UX. One of the Apache tarballs was created with libtool 1.4.2 but it didn't work on HP-UX. Maybe 1.4.x works on HP-UX. I was unable to recreate any problems this a.m. with libtool 1.4.2 with current Apache et al on HP-UX 11. I sent a note to the person I thought had mentioned the problem to see if it really was a problem (maybe I didn't do whatever makes it break). -- Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool, autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is up with your slackware?). Most likely a broken vendor installation of at least one involved tool. Reinstalling from ftp.gnu.org will usually cure this. Ensure that existing instances of the tool are nuked properly from the system before the new installation takes place. I've run configure and had it produce what seemed like a perfect run, only to realize that it didn't produce any Makefiles. Very strange. I like how apache *always* runs buildconf w/o failure on all my machines, regardless of autoconf/libtool versions. PHP requires: - working setup of any autoconf/automake version - libtool 1.4.x That's it. libtool 1.3 is not supported, because it has a different interface.. - Sascha Experience IRCG http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
Aaron Bannert wrote: PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool, autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is up with your slackware?). For what's it's worth, that's not been my experience. Assuming that the actual packages themselves work individually, I've not seen any dependencies other than the 1.4.2 one for libtool. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither - T.Jefferson
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool, autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is up with your slackware?). Most likely a broken vendor installation of at least one involved tool. Reinstalling from ftp.gnu.org will usually cure this. Ensure that existing instances of the tool are nuked properly from the system before the new installation takes place. They were not vendor-installed, I did it myself. I've never had any trouble with them except for PHP. Anyway, I don't know that this problem would affect any other project using the following versions of autoconf, automake, and libtool... I think it's a bug in PHP (probably in the configure script where main/internal_functions.c is supposed to get generated). So sorry in advance for the PHP-esque message on the APR list, but just in case anyone's interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/root/apache/php4# ./buildconf buildconf: checking installation... buildconf: autoconf version 2.50 (ok) buildconf: automake version 1.4-p4 (ok) buildconf: libtool version 1.4 (ok) ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/root/apache/php4# cat config.nice #! /bin/sh # # Created by configure './configure' \ '--enable-debug' \ '--with-apxs2=/root/apache/test/bin/apxs' \ '--with-openssldir=/usr' \ '--with-zlib=/usr' \ '--with-bz2=/usr' \ '--with-gdbm=/usr' \ '--with-jpeg-dir=/usr' \ '--with-png-dir=/usr' \ '--with-freetype-dir=/usr/X11R6' \ '--with-ttf=/usr/X11R6' \ $@ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/root/apache/php4# make /dev/null ... make: *** No rule to make target `main/internal_functions.c', needed by `main/internal_functions.lo'. Stop. main/internal_functions.c was never generated. Now at least it would get built by the Makefile if it *did* exist, which is more than used to happen. --Cliff -- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 11:15:18AM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:45:37AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it needs to be. The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4. Are there any platforms do _not_ support libtool 1.4 or have problems with it? The FreeBSD ports tree doesn't yet support libtool 1.4 (it's an 'ports' may not have it, but libtool 1.4 works fine on FreeBSD. Ben Collins-Sussman and yourself build Subversion on FreeBSD all the time, and that requires 1.4. ... no problem with just installing it yourself. Requiring 1.4 means that anyone developing on FreeBSD will have to install a custom libtool, which is irritating, but not a show stopper. It will create some Right. problems with the way the current FreeBSD port of apr works, but nothing unsolvable (i think). Then we'll simply need to fix the APR port, huh? :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
main/internal_functions.c was never generated. Now at least it would get built by the Makefile if it *did* exist, which is more than used to happen. Do you see a line creating main/internal_functions.c when running configure? If yes, please send me the output of configure, after adding set -x to the top of build/genif.sh. I'll then try to deduce what the problem could be. - Sascha Experience IRCG http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
