Re: [pacman-dev] [arch-general] SOLVED - Re: Need help understanding new "make install" failures - libtool: install: error: relink `blah...la' ??
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:47:35AM +0300, Bogdan Ionuț wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 17:02, David C. Rankin < drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
After the latest updates, I'm getting a number of package() "make install" failures on packages that have, until now, packaged just fine. Is anybody else experiencing this on packages you build? If so, do you know what is causing it -- and how to fix? I've searched and found that sometimes reordering
On 04/07/2012 06:54 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: the link
commands in the Makefile can help, but I can't figure out why things have packaged just fine up until now and are now failing. Since everything built fine with the build() command -- why the failure on package()??
I've also read another solution is to do away with the .la files completely and replace with a package config setup. However, before I try and tackle something like that, I want to figure out what broke. The failures during "make install" look like this (gwenview and tdegames examples:)
the failure:
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ltdeinit_gwenview collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status libtool: install: error: relink `gwenview.la' with the above command before installing it
All,
The answer was provided in an AUR post for spice-gtk:
Try editing the PKBUILD in package()
make -j1 DESTDIR="$pkgdir/" install
It seems that parallel building during package was the culprit. The build of tdegames went fine after adding -j1.
-- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Or options=(!makeflags)
Moving thread over here from aur-general, I think -j<something> is a great makeflag to build a kernel with, but there's no way to tell what packages will break with the flag. This kind of taints the /etc/makepkg.conf MAKEFLAGS variable, which is meant as a convenience. I followed the discussion earlier when someone tried to include a dynamic value for -j into a pkgbuild based on the number of cpus that could be located. Yeah, I too told him to use makepkg.conf, which is now under the impression of being a bad idea. Ideas? Let the people rot with inserting !makeflags into all PKGBUILDs that break on their config? cheers! mar77i
On 10/04/12 20:24, Martti Kühne wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:47:35AM +0300, Bogdan Ionuț wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 17:02, David C. Rankin < drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
After the latest updates, I'm getting a number of package() "make install" failures on packages that have, until now, packaged just fine. Is anybody else experiencing this on packages you build? If so, do you know what is causing it -- and how to fix? I've searched and found that sometimes reordering
On 04/07/2012 06:54 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: the link
commands in the Makefile can help, but I can't figure out why things have packaged just fine up until now and are now failing. Since everything built fine with the build() command -- why the failure on package()??
I've also read another solution is to do away with the .la files completely and replace with a package config setup. However, before I try and tackle something like that, I want to figure out what broke. The failures during "make install" look like this (gwenview and tdegames examples:)
the failure:
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ltdeinit_gwenview collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status libtool: install: error: relink `gwenview.la' with the above command before installing it
All,
The answer was provided in an AUR post for spice-gtk:
Try editing the PKBUILD in package()
make -j1 DESTDIR="$pkgdir/" install
It seems that parallel building during package was the culprit. The build of tdegames went fine after adding -j1.
-- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Or options=(!makeflags)
Moving thread over here from aur-general, I think -j<something> is a great makeflag to build a kernel with, but there's no way to tell what packages will break with the flag. This kind of taints the /etc/makepkg.conf MAKEFLAGS variable, which is meant as a convenience. I followed the discussion earlier when someone tried to include a dynamic value for -j into a pkgbuild based on the number of cpus that could be located. Yeah, I too told him to use makepkg.conf, which is now under the impression of being a bad idea.
Ideas? Let the people rot with inserting !makeflags into all PKGBUILDs that break on their config?
This has nothing to do with pacman or makepkg. MAKEFLAGS is not a bad idea when the developer of the software you are trying to packages are competent enough to write a Makefile (or use tool that does it for them...). Allan
participants (2)
-
Allan McRae
-
Martti Kühne