QA: install QA Notice: command not found: checking for libxmms... ./configure: line 45503: xmms-config: command not found ./configure: line 45505: xmms-config: command not found during configure execution: checking whether byte ordering is bigendian... no checking for MAXPATHLEN... 4096 checking for Python directory... /usr/local checking for Python2.5... header /usr/include/python2.5 library /usr/lib64 modules /usr/lib64/python2.5 checking if a Python application links... yes checking for libxmms... ./configure: line 45503: xmms-config: command not found ./configure: line 45505: xmms-config: command not found no checking for main in -lknewstuff... yes checking for main in -lkvm... no checking if doc should be compiled... yes checking if superkaramba should be compiled... yes
(In reply to comment #0) > checking for libxmms... ./configure: line 45503: xmms-config: command not found > ./configure: line 45505: xmms-config: command not found This is actually a false positive. I'll fix it to filter out the ones that are generated by configure scripts.
*** Bug 245714 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This is fixed in 2.2_rc15.
The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=b39e1edca0ee73f29b5513ab30f00da14d1291bc commit b39e1edca0ee73f29b5513ab30f00da14d1291bc Author: Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93@gmail.com> AuthorDate: 2023-12-20 06:36:38 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-12-20 14:04:12 +0000 ebuild: command not found QA: don't skip QA warnings that come from ./configure Down through the twisting trail of history, we find a 2008 bug report and commit 930bbbf31c10265b27825426f1eff6d7f17395e6, which disabled detecting "command not found" in ./configure scripts with the following rationale: > This is actually a false positive. I'll fix it to filter out the ones that are generated by configure scripts. As far as I can tell it wasn't a false positive though. Looking up the source code for that old project reveals no indication that it can misfire in "expected" ways. More generally, this obscures real issues in configure scripts -- why should configure scripts be special here? -- which have *zero* guarantee of resulting in failure. Anecdotally, they usually do not. Whatever the underlying issue is, it's *definitely* an upstream bug and *almost certainly* indicates that there may be situations where the project miscompiles against expectations. Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/245716 Signed-off-by: Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93@gmail.com> Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/portage/pull/1210 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> lib/portage/package/ebuild/doebuild.py | 11 ++--------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
