https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247817
Bug ID: 247817
Summary: lang/ruby26 and lang/ruby27: fails to build with
poudriere when 127.0.0.1 unavailable
Product: Ports & Packages
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
Severity: Affects Some People
Priority: ---
Component: Individual Port(s)
Assignee: r...@freebsd.org
Reporter: bugs.free...@scourger.nl
CC: and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk
Assignee: r...@freebsd.org
Flags: maintainer-feedback?(r...@freebsd.org)
Created attachment 216274
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=216274&action=edit
Logfile of a failed build with poudriere.
Overview:
Both lang/ruby26 and lang/ruby27 fail to build with a jailed poudriere where
the loopback interface has an address other than "127.0.0.1".
How to reproduce:
* On a FreeBSD 11.3 system, create a jail with a non-standard address on the
loopback interface (such as 127.0.0.5).
* Install poudriere inside the jail.
* Build ruby26 using poudriere. The build-jails created by poudriere should
also use some IP other than 127.0.0.1.
With this setup, Ruby fails to build succesfully with "poudriere bulk -j
default -p default lang/ruby26". See the attached logfile for details of a
recent attempt.
When poudriere is run in 'interactive' mode with "poudriere bulk -j default -p
default -i lang/ruby26", it is possible to simply compile the port by running
"make" inside the build-jail. Manually building the port inside a jail (even
without a loopback address) also works. It only seems to fail whenever
poudriere is used to perform the build.
Expected cause:
The "configuring socket" stage of the build compiles and runs a test program
with getaddrinfo. At this point, a check is made if "127.0.0.1" exists (which
isn't the case).
Such hardcoded loopback addresses are used in "ext/socket/extconf.rb":
if (strcmp(straddr, "127.0.0.1") != 0) {
goto bad;
If I understand correctly, this results in the build script trying to compile
its own version of getaddrinfo (instead of using the one provided by the OS),
which ultimately fails due to a conflicting function name (see the log).
Credits to RhodiumToad on freenode, who helped diagnosing the problem and
pointing out the likely culprit.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
