https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c kk zhang changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kkzhang@suse.com AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |mls@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c2 L. A. Walsh changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Comment #2 from L. A. Walsh 2012-07-31 19:56:59 PDT --- Simply asserting that the library is in db-devel doesn't mean that it works... Did you try to build it? Could you include the build log? I have db_devel installed. Part of the issue stems from the build procedure for Perl using a broken script to generate Perl. I don't know why it works for some people and not others -- I've tried MANY variations -- I've built perl up until I installed Suse 12.1. Since then I've had multiple build issues because more and more, the builds in open suse aren't being tested on any development system to see if they might possible work. I have seen builds fail due to broken packages suse requires for other packages (libunwind being one that comes to mind -- causing a samba build to fail as it can't build if libunwind is present, as it autoconfigs for stack traceback (A GOOD THING, but unsupported by SUSE) as suse only builds shared libs and doesn't provide a shared version of one of the libunwind modules (libunwind-ptrace is only in an ".la".) But if you try to build any smb related file system features like: gvfsd-smb,gvfsd-smb-browser, fusesmb fusesmb.cache -- they require you load libunwind. So you can't build all of samba and it's related features at once. But samba is ANOTHER story... the Perl procedure uses something called "configure.gnu" with a bunch of options -- but at some point, (I DO remember it being a real configure script at one point -- maybe in a a different reality), but right now, if you type configure.gnu, you'll see that non of the options passed to it are supported -- including the options to include building of the DBM systems. So when perl builds, it doesn't see that any of the DBM systems are needed and thus doesn't build them (!!)... thus the test cases (~8 out of 15k+ tests) involving the DB stuff fail and and the build fails. So I want to know how you can get it to build with your script, when the configure.gnu script in the perl.tar ignores those options.... Ishtar:home/packages/build/perl-5.14.2# configure.gnu --help Usage: configure.gnu [options] This is GNU configure-like front end for a metaconfig-generated Configure. It emulates the following GNU configure options (must be fully spelled out): --help --no-create --prefix=PREFIX --cache-file (ignored) --quiet --silent --verbose --version ---- Yet the build script tries to use that bogus script to build in DBM support: chmod 755 ./configure.gnu ./configure.gnu --prefix=/usr -Dvendorprefix=/usr -Dinstallusrbinperl -Dusethreads -Di_db -Di_dbm -Di_ndbm -Di_gdbm -Dd_dbm_open -Duseshrplib=\'true\' $options make %{?_smp_mflags} -- mv savelib lib ./configure.gnu --prefix=/usr -Dvendorprefix=/usr -Dinstallusrbinperl -Dusethreads -Di_db -Di_dbm -Di_ndbm -Di_gdbm -Dd_dbm_open $options make %{?_smp_mflags} uses incorrect/unsupported options -- almost all related to dbm support, in 2 places. So, how does this build pass the perl tests that include testing of dbm support? During the configure run I see: dbmclose() NOT found. Hmm. Based on the hints in hints/linux.sh, the recommended value for $i_dbm on this machine was "define"! Keep the recommended value? [y] ] ... found. NOT found. NOT found. dbm_open() NOT found. Hmm. Based on the hints in hints/linux.sh, the recommended value for $d_dbm_open on this machine was "define"! Keep the recommended value? [y] Checking if your uses prototypes... getaddrinfo() found. found. gdbm_open() NOT found. Hmm. Based on the hints in hints/linux.sh, the recommended value for $i_gdbm on this machine was "define"! Keep the recommended value? [y] ----- The comment *seemed* to indicate it was the responsibility of the loaded plugin to load the loadable library (i.e. if you 'use *db*', that loads a .so which should have some ref to... But there is code in the config script specifically to remove any attempts to define -Ddbm on the default build line, --- expecting that the libs will be passed to to the plugins -- and maybe the dbm plugin is -- bug then the magick one that is needed on suse 'gdbm-compat' isn't -- and it's the only one that really defines the refs to the others.. It's screwed up, and I really don't know how you got it to build. I haven't been able to rebuild perl in anyway shape or form (using their configure scripts, using perl-brew--- nada... due to this problem). Why it only cropped up on suse12.1... dunno... But rather than just telling me db-devel is installed, I'd ask you to show me the build logs which include the perl-test suite that run the db tests -- as I'd like to find out why it build in factory (at some point) but I can't build it trying any which way (and while I and others CAN, with hoops, build samba, no one has yet claimed to be able to build perl...(5.14.2 or 5.16.0 -- the latter having been my primary target, to check to see if some perl bugs were fixed... but having no luck with that, I tried 5.14.2 -- then the rpmbuild... .. and about 87 other things as well... sigh... thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c4 --- Comment #4 from L. A. Walsh 2012-08-01 04:09:50 PDT --- So if I understand you correctly, it the case that perl5.14.2 doesn't build on 12.1 without a patch. When will the patch be released? I.e. available to download from the updates to the srcs so I can zipper down a new src package. Does the fact that it's a new src mean a new binary should be built? I use rpmbuild for rebuilding suse packages. But when I tried to build perl 5.16.0, it was fairly well before it was available from any opensuse builder. I later found the rpm specfile from a build in the projects dir, but as you seem to indicate -- it doesn't build on 12.1. So while it may have build on 11.4 and on current factory (12.2), it doesn't build on 12.1 (yet) ... (or until you release the patch to the 12.1 mirrors...)... Or do I not understand something? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c6 Michael Schröder changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #6 from Michael Schröder 2012-08-01 11:46:38 UTC --- (back to invalid) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c8 --- Comment #8 from L. A. Walsh 2012-08-01 10:43:54 PDT --- Oh...and I build the x86_64 rpms not the 32bit rpms...(or try to anyway)... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771559#c10 Michael Schröder changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |CLOSED Resolution| |INVALID --- Comment #10 from Michael Schröder 2012-08-02 08:44:21 UTC --- Closing again as invalid until you answer how 'rpmbuild -ba perl.spec' with our 12.1 sources fails for you. And even if it fails for you I'll probably also close it as invalid as we're not supporting the build for every configuration. That's because of two reasons: - there are millions of possible package configurations, there's no way we can make sure the build works for all of them - we need reproducible builds, where we have control about what the package configuration is. That's why our packages are built with a specific set of packages. That's why we use 'build' to setup a chroot environment for building. This is not a SUSE invention (while we where probably the first to do it): Fedora uses 'mock' for exactly the same reason. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.