First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 165981
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: CLOSED
Resolution: TEST-REQUEST
Assigned To: Qmail Team <qmail-bugs@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Allen Brooker (AllenJB) <gentoo-bugs@allenjb.me.uk>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 165981 depends on: Show dependency tree
Show dependency graph
Bug 165981 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)





View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2007-02-08 19:31 0000
While I fully realise that the use of QMAIL_PATCH_DIR on netqmail isn't
officially supported, I'd like to suggest a change to the way the netqmail
ebuild handles conf-cc.

The cause of this problem is that some patches edit conf-cc to add new
requirements. For example, I'm using the popular jms1 combined patch
(http://qmail.jms1.net), that changes conf-cc to: 
cc -O2 -DTLS -DEXTERNAL_TODO -I/usr/local/ssl/include -I/usr/kerberos/include

This obviously causes problems when Gentoo's ebuild replaces the entire file:
echo -n "$(tc-getCC) ${CFLAGS}" > "${MY_S}/conf-cc"

I'd like to suggest that instead of replacing the entire file, the ebuild uses
a patch (or sed, or whatever's the best way) to replace just the standard 'cc
-O2' that the file contains by default.

I've not used sed before, but from looking at some documentation, something
like the following would appear to do the trick: sed 's/cc -O2/$(tc-getCC)
${CFLAGS}/' <${MY_S}/conf-cc >${MY_S}/conf-cc

My guess is that something similar could also be done with the conf-ld file to
also support a wider range of patches there.

There may be other alternatives which I've missed, which may solve the problem
better.

------- Comment #1 From Michael Hanselmann (hansmi) (RETIRED) 2007-02-11 18:55:08 0000 -------
Fixed in -1.05-r5, can you please test it? Thanks.

------- Comment #2 From Allen Brooker (AllenJB) 2007-02-12 18:54:44 0000 -------
This appears to be working for me. Thanks very much. =)

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug