Alex Elder wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 11:26 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 06:46:11AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> Spoken too soon. While this second patch at least compiles on my Debian
>>> testing system it doesn't link:
>>> /tmp/ccWcHXtY.o: In function `CleanupDbmLookup':
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:304: undefined reference to `dbm_close'
>>> /tmp/ccWcHXtY.o: In function `DoDbmLookup':
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:220: undefined reference to `dbm_fetch'
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:264: undefined reference to `dbm_fetch'
>>> /tmp/ccWcHXtY.o: In function `InitDbmLookup':
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:144: undefined reference to `dbm_open'
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:178: undefined reference to `dbm_store'
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:191: undefined reference to `dbm_close'
>>> /root/xfstests-dev/src/dbtest.c:196: undefined reference to `dbm_open'
>>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>> make: *** [dbtest] Error 1
>>> make: *** [src] Error 2
>>> make: *** [default] Error 2
>> Where is libgdbm-compat on your system?
> I think we need to do a better job of defining what's required
> for this stuff--building and running. I know I had trouble
> the first time I set things up, and now that it works I
> have no recollection of the stuff that I did. It would be
> good to make it easier for people to get testing going,
> we might get more people actually running them in a wider
> variety of environments.
Making missing stuff gracefully handled runtime helps...
I also have a hacked up rpm for this, that way package dependencies
take care of it all seamlessly:
BuildRequires: autoconf, libtool, xfsprogs-devel, e2fsprogs-devel
BuildRequires: libacl-devel, libattr-devel, libaio-devel
Requires: bash, xfsprogs, xfsdump, perl, acl, attr, bind-utils
Requires: bc, indent, quota
If I just knew a decent place to drop the stuff that was compliant
with fs hierarchy rules, I'd toss it into fedora, and debian might
not be far behind ...
> xfs mailing list