apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Do not include <uuid.h> and <uuid/uuid.h> in same file
Date Wed, 22 Feb 2006 17:01:43 GMT
My gut says if we cannot solve this trivial problem over the course of three+
months due to a utter lack of competency in autoconf (and lack of time by
the small handful who understand it), perhaps the project should consider
alternatives to autoconf as we start looking down the road at APR 2.0.0?

Does anyone have any positive experiences with other configuration and feature
detection tools?

Bill


William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Well one mystery is solved.  Folks experiencing build breakage likely have
> installed python2.4, which deposits libuuid into /usr/local/lib, without
> any corresponding header file.
> 
> We have only one election to use osuuid, and that is a bogus test for 
> the lib.
> The proper test must check that the uuid_t resolves, and generate_uuid 
> can be
> invoked without compile warnings, no matter if it is declared in uuid.h,
> uuid/uuid.h, or somewhere in the bowels of unistd.h or other common system
> header files.
> 
> Throwing the yes/no flag on the linkability of generate_uuid against -luuid
> or the clib is pretty broken behavior.
> 
> Bill
> 
> Garrett Rooney wrote:
> 
>> On 2/14/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Garrett Rooney wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/2/05, Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I maintain the port of APR for the FreeBSD ports system.
>>>>> I was assigned the following bug:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/88406
>>>>>
>>>>> If e2fsprogs is installed on a FreeBSD 5.4 system,
>>>>> compilation of APR fails, because types conflict
>>>>> if <uuid.h> (from the system) and <uuid/uuid.h> (from e2fsprogs)
are
>>>>> both included.
>>>>>
>>>>> <uuid.h> is a relatively recent addition to FreeBSD and
>>>>> was added in the FreeBSD 5.x timeframe.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this patch acceptable for apr?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me, committed in r355780.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the delay, this has been sitting in my inbox forever and I
>>>> just got a chance to try it out.
>>>
>>>
>>> Could this commit be the origin of breakage on Macintosh OS/X?  Both 
>>> 1.2.x
>>> and trunk fail to compile on Darwin7.9.0 kernel at this moment.
>>
>>
>>
>> AFAIK this patch was never merged into 1.2.x, so if you're having
>> trouble building 1.2.x it's probably something else.
>>
>> -garrett
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message