Bug 186458 – net-analyzer/zabbix-1.4 dependency problem with USE=oracle

• Status: RESOLVED UPSTREAM
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Eckard Brauer 2007-07-24 12:48:30 UTC]

Zabbix 1.4 won't compile properly with oracle database, because libsqlora8 is probably not found. Even if it is, latest version in official portage is too old (separate bug).

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. use system without libsqlora*
2. echo "net-analyzer/zabbix" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords
3. echo "net-analyzer/zabbix oracle server" >> /etc/portage/package.use
4. emerge zabbix
Actual Results:  
Configure fails because "Not found Sqlora8 library"


Patch zabbix ebuild with:

--- start ---
--- /usr/portage/net-analyzer/zabbix/zabbix-1.4.ebuild  2007-06-08 03:41:21.000000000 +0200
+++ /usr/local/portage/own/net-analyzer/zabbix/zabbix-1.4.ebuild        2007-07-24 13:44:04.000000000 +0200
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
        mysql? ( virtual/mysql )
        sqlite3? ( =dev-db/sqlite-3* )
        postgres? ( dev-db/libpq )
+       oracle? ( >=dev-libs/libsqlora8-2.3.2 )
        jabber? ( dev-libs/iksemel )
        curl? ( net-misc/curl )"
 RDEPEND="${RDEPEND} net-analyzer/fping"
--- end ---

However, dev-libs/libsqlora8-2.3.2 is currently NOT in portage, and 2.2.11 will fail with a linker error (sqlo_autocommit_off and sqlo_autocommit_on not found). Please search for a separate bug here.

[Comment 1 Patrick Lauer 2010-01-09 13:11:36 UTC]

Does that problem persist with zabbix-1.8 ?
(I assume it does, but I cannot test as I have no oracle install)

[Comment 2 Eckard Brauer 2010-01-11 11:36:25 UTC]

For 1.6 it worked. Trying 1.8 this night.

[Comment 3 Eckard Brauer 2010-01-12 13:28:19 UTC]

Installing 1.8 with Oracle DB works.

However, there are a few issues with the SQL scripts (which therefor should be handled upstream):

For avoiding the interpretation of "&" characters specially a line "set define off" should be inserted at start.

At least at the update scripts, constructs like "alter table ... add ... nvarchar2(...) DEFAULT '' NOT NULL;" are wrong. Why not insert '0', as in other columns?

[Comment 4 Patrick Lauer 2010-01-15 22:50:31 UTC]

Thanks for testing. Please try to motivate upstream to fix things :)