Fwd: [bug & patch] libstdc++ in linux_base-7.1_3

[Mezz bsdforums.org]

Hey guys, hope you don't mind this forward email, because I have been 
reading the 'flashpluginwrapper problem.' subject. The bug is in the 
linux_base, but nobody seem to check on this in the freebsd-ports. Looks 
like Brandon D. Valentine might needs to create a PR to get the better 
attention and keep the track.

Cheers,
Mezz

>Summary:
>
>This began as a problem report from <reigncracks at hotmail.com> inquiring
>about my linux-flashplugin6 port's dependency on the Linux libstdc++
>shared library.  I traced this to a bug in the linux_base-7.1 port.
>Patch is attached.
>
>Feel free to tell me to go file a PR, but this seems like a pretty
>trivial fix to go to all of that trouble.  This is going to -ports since
>-ports is listed as the MAINTAINER.
>
>On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 06:19:39PM -0500, Mezz bsdforums.org wrote:
> > I seem to not able find libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 in the ports tree, but
> > only can find libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 (linked to
> > libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so) that came with the lastest linux_base. 
>Just
> > asking, because linux-flash6 required the libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 to 
>make
> > it works. So, I linked it libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 ->
> > libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so to get linux-flash6 works with the Opera.
> >
> > Perhaps, either linux_base or linux-flash6 needs to update to get
> > linux-flash6 works?
> >
> > ================
> > $ pkg_info | grep linux
> > linux-flashplugin-6.0r69
> > linux-opera-7.1.0.20030410
> > linux_base-7.1_3
> > ================
>
>This appears to be the result of a bug introduced into the linux_base
>port in PORTREVISION 7.1_2.  linux_base-7.1 originally installed the
>RedHat 7.1 libstdc++ RPM (libstdc++-2.96-81.i386.rpm) as a PATCHFILE.
>In Revision 1.64 of the Makefile the logic to install the PATCHFILES was
>removed.  In the same commit the libstdc++ RPM was moved from the
>PATCHFILES to the DISTFILES and so no problem manifested at that time.
>Revision 1.69 of ports/emulators/linux_base/Makefile upgraded the
>libstdc++ RPM to the RedHat 7.1 update package
>(libstdc++-2.96-112.7.1.i386.rpm).  The upgrade moved libstdc++ back to
>the PATCHFILES because the RPM was only available in the
>PATCH_SITE_SUBDIR.  Since PORTREVISION 2 the linux_base port has not
>install the libstdc++ shared library.  This is a Bad Thing<tm>.
>
>733 taran:/home/bandix% pkg_info | grep linux_base
>linux_base-7.1_3    The base set of packages needed in Linux mode
>734 taran:/home/bandix% /usr/compat/linux/bin/rpm -qa | grep libstdc++
>compat-libstdc++-6.2-2.9.0.14
>
>The libstdc++ file is _fetched_, just not installed:
>
>735 taran:/home/bandix% rpm -qpl 
>/usr/ports/distfiles/rpm/libstdc++-2.96-112.7.1.i386.rpm
>/usr/lib/libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so
>/usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3
>
>The attached patch to the linux_base Makefile bumps PORTREVISION and
>reverts the change in v1.64 of the Makefile which removed the logic to
>install the PATCHFILES.
>
>Note: It is messy to put the logic to install PATCHFILES inside
>do-install but there's no way it can go inside of do-patch since during
>do-patch the RPM database isn't initialized.  I assume this is why this
>was done this way in the original port.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brandon D. Valentine
>--
>brandon at dvalentine.com                                 
>http://www.geekpunk.net
>Pseudo-Random Googlism:  peace is not


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
-------------- next part --------------
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/emulators/linux_base/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.73
diff -r1.73 Makefile
10c10
< PORTREVISION=		3
---
> PORTREVISION=		4
146a147,152
> 	done
> #
> # Install updates
> 	@for R in ${PATCHFILES}; do \
> 		${ECHO} $$R; \
> 		${RPM} -U ${RPMFLAGS} ${RPMDIR}/$$R; \