On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 19:38:29 -0400 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 02:09:47AM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote: > > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 23:58:47 +0200 Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > Boris Samorodov p????e v so 04. 08. 2007 v 01:30 +0400: > > > > > > Seems that running ldconfig while building a package at package > > > > cluster (i.e. when PACKAGE_BUILDING is defined) is quite useless. [1] > > > > > > > > To be more specific I'm interested at linux ports. ATM we run linux > > > > ldconfig (using linuxulator) _at package building_. Hence to create a > > > > package for FC6 port we should change compat.linux.osrelease (which I > > > > don't like and try to avoid). If the "ldconfig" stage may be skipped > > > > when PACKAGE_BUILDING is defined then things get way too easier both > > > > for default kernel linux.osrelease and default linux_base port change. > > > > > I don't follow - what is the problem? > > > > An FC6 port can't be build (and more specific -- linux-fc6 ldconfig > > doesn't run) with current default compat.linux.osrelease=2.4.2. So > > this sysctl should be changed to 2.6.16 for package building sake. > > When the default compat.linux.osrelease will be switched to 2.6.16 we > > will get the other way round problem if we try to build and FC4 port. > > > > I don't like the status quo and want to find a way to siplify it.
> That's a kernel problem, not a ldconfig problem. Kris, now I don't follow. Can you explain what did you mean? WBR -- bsam _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
