Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 5660 - Problem when updating to mysql-3.23.51-r3
Summary: Problem when updating to mysql-3.23.51-r3
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Server (show other bugs)
Hardware: x86 Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Jon Nelson (RETIRED)
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-07-27 18:22 UTC by patg68
Modified: 2003-02-04 19:42 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description patg68 2002-07-27 18:22:51 UTC
Here are my error msg :

/usr/include/tcpd.h: In function `void* handle_connections_sockets(void*)':
/usr/include/tcpd.h:162: too few arguments to function `void
sock_host(request_info*)'
mysqld.cc:2428: at this point in file
/usr/include/tcpd.h:78: too few arguments to function `int
hosts_access(request_info*)'
mysqld.cc:2429: at this point in file
/usr/include/tcpd.h:146: too few arguments to function `char*
eval_client(request_info*)'
mysqld.cc:2437: at this point in file
make[3]: *** [mysqld.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/mysql-3.23.51-r3/work/mysql-3.23.51/sql'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/mysql-3.23.51-r3/work/mysql-3.23.51/sql'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/mysql-3.23.51-r3/work/mysql-3.23.51'
make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2

!!! ERROR: The ebuild did not complete successfully.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 85, Exitcode 2
!!! compile problem
Comment 1 Jacob Perkins 2002-07-28 12:46:10 UTC
I had the same problem, but it emerged fine by adding -tcpd to USE. Of course,
I'd like to have it emerge with tcpd.
Comment 2 Kai Duebbert 2002-07-28 14:52:15 UTC
mysql-3.23.51-r3.ebuild works with the following fix on line 48:  
# patch -p1 < ${FILESDIR}/mysql-3.23.51-tcpd.patch || die  
has to be changed to:  
patch -p1 < ${FILESDIR}/mysql-3.23.51-tcpd.patch || die  
  
Seems this problem wasn't fixed by upstream. Compiling with gcc3.1.  
Comment 3 patg68 2002-07-28 17:36:26 UTC
I already have tcpd in use, but it doesn't emerge anyway...
Comment 4 Jon Nelson (RETIRED) 2002-07-28 21:24:58 UTC
Please give -r4 a try -- just did a CVS commit.
Comment 5 Jacob Perkins 2002-07-28 22:46:21 UTC
r4 works with tcpd for me now
Comment 6 patg68 2002-07-29 02:01:14 UTC
Now it works for me too...
Comment 7 Donny Davies (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2002-07-29 17:38:16 UTC
Alright.

I wrote that patch myself.  It was easy enough, but still, it's a
little disheartening to see what's gone on with it.  I've had this
happen to me before; developers dropping other developers patches.

I clearly named it with "3.23.51" in the filename.  I had a clear
ChangeLog entry for this patch.  Let me say I've written most of
this ebuild, and taken pains to make sure its an easy-to-maintain
one, for myself, but also for *any* developer interested in helping.
But all kidding aside now, the flailing around with it of late has
been a little cheesy, dont we think?

I wrote this patch on June 22.  Then on 25 Jul 2002:
25 Jul 2002; Ryan Phillips <rphillips@gentoo.org> mysql-3.23.51-r2.ebuild :

  The -tcpd- patch appears to have been fixed upstream.  It has been
  removed from the ebuild

the patch was removed from the same version, mysql-3.23.51. WHY?
how exactly is "mysql-3.23.51-r2.ebuild" 'upstream' from my
commit of 3.23.51?

then on july 28, we get:
28 Jul 2002; Jon Nelson <jnelson@gentoo.org> mysql-3.23.51-r4.ebuild:
  
  Add back in the tcpd patch -- seems to cause compile failure

---

My patch has been flip-flopped in the stable ebuild release.

Then we had a glitch with an initscript.

Now, I figure I could post to the public mailing lists, and
bitch and complain, and trash the people making mistakes, but
that sounds pretty lame to me.  Instead, a little gripe here
will satisfy my urges ;)

I hope we can step a little less on each other's toes, and
co-operate a little better in the future?

Donny
Comment 8 Jon Nelson (RETIRED) 2002-08-01 21:36:06 UTC
This bug should be closed, because apparently its no longer a problem.