Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 663220 - dev-libs/check ebuild autoconf fails on absence of meaningless placeholder autotools template file
Summary: dev-libs/check ebuild autoconf fails on absence of meaningless placeholder au...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: AMD64 Linux
: Normal normal
Assignee: No maintainer - Look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers if you want to take care of it
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-08-09 09:47 UTC by Erik
Modified: 2018-11-27 15:34 UTC (History)
1 user (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 Erik 2018-08-09 09:47:02 UTC
I have the following set in my make.conf:

INSTALL_MASK="TODO* CREDITS* NEWS* ANNOUNCE* AUTHORS* CHANGES*"

I used to also wipe INSTALL* (as the ebuild is doing that, yeah? Can you think of a less meangfull collection of a less usefull set of files to have in /usr/share?)

This package has no INSTALL file, because the instructions are in README.md, which says to run:
    $ autoreconf --install
    $ ./configure
    $ make
    $ make check

autoreconf fails because there is no meaningless generic template INSTALL file to add. "touch INSTALL" fixes that just as well as some default placeholder template garbage.

It then configures and makes cleanly.

where do I have to put a "touch INSTALL" in the filesystem to make the e-build not fail autoconf?
Comment 1 Erik 2018-08-09 09:55:18 UTC
fixed with:
emerge -e1O automake

to put back the meaningless placeholder template file that this e-build requires to complete.
Comment 2 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2018-10-08 14:40:29 UTC
what concrete build issue are you getting? I guess it will build ok as doesn't try to run install commands manually... then, I don't see what is the problem here
Comment 3 Erik 2018-10-22 11:10:20 UTC
I ran the autoconf commands to find out why the ebuild was failing.

I had configured the INSTALL_MASK variable to filter out some of the files that GNU packages like to litter systems with.

The PROBLEM is that the ___E_B_U_I_L_D___ is configured to run autoconf in forced mode, and,
 - upon finding that dev-libs/check doesn't have ALL of the GNU detritus files
 - it goes to the autoconf collection of default vanilla, unmodified detritus
 - it wanted to add the generic autoconf detritus template files to dev-libs/check
 - I had filtered out ALL of the detritus files INCLUDING the autoconf generic detritus templates that dev-libs/check was trying to copy into the dev-libs/check build directory.

the   ___E_B_U_I_L_D___  for dev-libs/check failed BECAUSE it is configured to take vanilla template garbage and add it to the build directory, then copy it to the target system.

I worked around this bug in the dev-libs/check  ___E_B_U_I_L_D___  by re-building autoconf WITHOUT the INSTALL_MASK filter. This provided the dev-libs/check ebuild with the generic template detritus that it was failing to add to the build directory.

the  ___E_B_U_I_L_D___  then succeeded in adding generic template detritus to my system and continued on it's merry way to completion.

the BUG with the  ___E_B_U_I_L_D___  is that it is configured to add generic template GNU project description documents to the system, for absolutely no purpose beyond adding useless noise and misinformation to the installed documentation, and if it is unsuccessful in adding the meaningless noise and clutter it fails.
Comment 4 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2018-10-31 18:18:30 UTC
ebuild is running eautoreconf that is the canonical way to run autoreconf. If you think eautoreconf is not doing what it should do, the problem should be addressed at the autotools.eclass level
Comment 5 Erik 2018-11-27 15:34:20 UTC
Mate

the problem isn't the tool you use to call autoconf. It's the *options* that you call autoconf with.

Why, out of a couple of hundred other packages, is yours the ONLY package that --forces the creation of a second copy of meaningless junk package maintainer vanilla template files for initial package creation onto production system?

It's just you mate.

If it is the cannon then it is a cannon of just you.

Are you even reading the problem?

Do you understand the problem?