libtool issues

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

On 06/20/2011 01:03 AM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> I am maintainer of the science/vis5d+ port.  It doesn't build on the
> i386 with FreeBSD-8.0-RELEASE, as is shown here:
>
> http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-errorlogs/a.8.20110223062852/vis5d+-1.2.1_15.log
>
> I know that other ports have this problem such as science/libctl.  This
> port is currently marked broken for exactly this reason.
>
> I have a work around at this PR: ports/155105.  This work around was
> improved in ports/155655 (see the follow up comment by the maintainer,
> who submits a patch to libctl).
>
> I also reported the problem at ports/155546, although I don't think my
> solution there is very good, and my description of the bug wa very
> incomplete.  Furthermore, it turns out that this problem does not take
> place under the FreeBSD-8.2-STABLE.  This can make the problem a little
> bit hard to diagnose.  Nevertheless I can see this problem recurring
> systematically again in the future, because libtool was not designed for
> multiple compiler environments.
>
> It would be great to find a work around.  One way would be to put in
> some kind of construction like ports/155105 or ports/155655 into
> Mk/bsd.autotools.mk.  So whenever the port has USE_LIBTOOLS set, we have
> the following code
>
> LIBTOOLS_DIR=${WRKDIR}/.libtools.dir.${PORTNAME}.${PREFIX:S/\//_/g}
> ${LN} -s ${LOCALBASE}/bin/${CC} ${LIBTOOLS_DIR}/cc
> ${LN} -s ${LOCALBASE}/bin/${CXX} ${LIBTOOLS_DIR}/c++
> MAKE_ENV+= PATH=${LIBTOOLS_DIR}:$$PATH
>
> Or one could instead modify devel/libtools, maybe something like this.
> Rename bin/libtool to libexec/libtool.sh, and then rewrite the libtool
> script as something like:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> PREFIX=/usr/local
> TEMPCCDIR=`mktemp -d -t /tmp`
> export PATH=${WRKDIR}:$PATH
> ${LN} -s ${LOCALBASE}/bin/${CC} ${TEMPCCDIR}/cc
> ${LN} -s ${LOCALBASE}/bin/${CXX} ${TEMPCCDIR}/c++
> ${PREFIX}/libexec/libtool.sh $@
> rm -r ${TEMPCCDIR}
>
> I know these are real hacks.  But since we are trying to patch something
> into libtool that it really isn't designed for, perhaps my hackish
> approach has advantages.  In particular, one doesn't have to redesign
> different patches every time there is a libtool version update.
>
> Just some ideas.  In the meantime, do you think it is OK to commit
> ports/155105 and the libctl part of ports/155655?  It would be nice to
> get these ports working again on the i386, at least on a temporary basis.

It looks like my random ideas are not good.

However, in the meantime, do you think it would be OK to remove the 
"broken" status of the port science/libctl?  It does build just fine 
under i386 FreeBSD-8.2-stable.

Or maybe a better idea is to rewrite the BROKEN message:

BROKEN=	Does not build with some versions of FreeBSD with i386 or 
sparc64.  But try make -DTRYBROKEN to see if it works for you.