Subject: Re: specifying database options
To: Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com>
From: Johnny Lam <jlam@pkgsrc.org>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 12/20/2005 10:21:03
Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> So it seems bdb.buildlink3.mk is broken, and that setting something in
> mk.conf isn't really a way around this. But, it's quite likely I'm
> missing something here. Reading the commit log for 1.11, it seems
> this behavior is intended. Perhaps unsetting the db2 line in cucipop
> will enable it to build with db4. What isn't clear to me is whether
> packages can reasonably insist on db2 but not db4, and if it really is
> possible to install things in parallel. Did you already have db4
> installed?
This is a bug in mail/cucipop/Makefile. This package only works with
db2 and no other Berkeley DB implementation -- it should not be using
mk/bdb.buildlink3.mk, but rather be using databases/db/buildlink3.mk
directly.
bdb.buildlink3.mk forces you to pick a Berkeley DB implementation
(BDB_DEFAULT) and to stick with it for that packages that can be built
against different versions of Berkeley DB. For packages that only work
with a single version of Berkeley DB, they should just depend on that DB
package directly since the various databases/db{,3,4} packages can all
be installed without conflicts.
My search of pkgsrc shows the following packages should need fixing.
I've excluded packages that are setting BDB_ACCEPTED to "db1".
mail/cucipop
mail/isync
mail/mutt-devel
security/pks
We should try to fix this during the freeze so the branch is free of
this problem.
Cheers,
-- Johnny Lam <jlam@pkgsrc.org>