Very Computer

I have a clean FTP install of 2.9 (with all options, generic kernel) on
a P120/48 and I'm having endless trouble compiling ports in particular.

Starting from a completely clean ports tree (deleted entirely then cvs'd
a new one). Compiling MySQL fails (it goes and gets the correct latest
version successfully). PHP4 fails too. The errors are never very
informative.

The pth library used by MySQL needed to be compiled too, but the version
obtained through the ports tree failed to compile too (not a good sign).
When I contacted the maintainer about this, he sent me a copy of his
(which was supposedly the same version as from the ports tree) and that
compiled OK, but did not help MySQL. Here's an example error from
MySQL's make:

cc -DMAP_TO_USE_RAID -I./../include -I../include  
-I/usr/local/include/pth -I/usr/include  -DDBUG_OFF -O2 -c mi_dynrec.c
/tmp/cce27495.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/cce27495.s:4086: Error: Local symbol L203  never defined.
/tmp/cce27495.s:4086: Error: Local symbol L231  never defined.
/tmp/cce27495.s:4086: Error: Local symbol L238  never defined.
/tmp/cce27495.s:4086: Fatal error:3 errors, 0 warnings, no object file
generated.

*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/databases/mysql/work/mysql-3.23.40/myisam.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/databases/mysql/work/mysql-3.23.40 (line 269 of
Makefile).
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/databases/mysql/work/mysql-3.23.40 (line 397 of
Makefile).
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/databases/mysql (line 1635 of
/usr/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk).

Any ideas about what's wrong? This particular error looks fairly deep
down - it's not giving me any indication of where the poblem might be
inside mi_dynrec.c. I haven't the faintest idea of how to go about
fixing this kind of problem.

So far the only port I have managed to compile successfully is moria!

Thanks

So, I wonder if using a freshly CVS'd version of the ports with a
stock 2.9 install doesn't work right for some reason.

It's read somewhere that there is only one version of the ports
tree, but that may be wrong.  If you look at ftp.openbsd.org there
are at least two different ports files (different sizes):

ncftp /pub/OpenBSD > ls -l 2.9/ports.tar.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 service  service      4107012 May  1 16:17 2.9/ports.tar.gz
ncftp /pub/OpenBSD > ls -l snapshots/ports.tar.gz
-r--r--r--   1 12187    mirror      4565448 Aug  7 04:01 snapshots/ports.tar.gz

I'd try just downloading the one for 2.9 and starting with that.

Anyone know for sure about different versions of the ports tree?

Do you use the word 'current' to mean bleeding-edge unstable, or just
the most recent stable distribution?

I don't want to be unstable/testing in OpenBSD, but I do want to track
bug fixes in 2.9.  So, which 'tag' do I want to use for updating the
ports system?

OpenBSD-Current is not as well tested as is FreeBSD-STABLE at any given
point in time since FreeBSD's CURRENT source tree offers an opportunity
to test various changes before moving those changes to the STABLE tree.
OpenBSD simply does not have the number of contributors which FreeBSD
has, thus maintaining a separate STABLE tree is out of the question.

You can always upgrade your OpenBSD-Release to OpenBSD-snapshot since
the snapshots are taken at a time when the system is reasonably stable,
and the current ports will work with the snapshot.

Quote:> With FreeBSD you have all kinds of tags to keep track of.  With OpenBSD
> there is one -current.  On the systems which I don't play with, I
> install the release source tree and as patches become necessary, I
> apply those patches to the release source.  Current on OpenBSD is
> analogous to FreeBSD-STABLE, since the next release will be a snapshot
> of the OpenBSD-Current code as will the next release of FreeBSD be a
> snapshot of FreeBSD-STABLE.

> OpenBSD-Current is not as well tested as is FreeBSD-STABLE at any given
> point in time since FreeBSD's CURRENT source tree offers an opportunity
> to test various changes before moving those changes to the STABLE tree.
> OpenBSD simply does not have the number of contributors which FreeBSD
> has, thus maintaining a separate STABLE tree is out of the question.

> You can always upgrade your OpenBSD-Release to OpenBSD-snapshot since
> the snapshots are taken at a time when the system is reasonably stable,
> and the current ports will work with the snapshot.

The thing I don't understand is why I'm having trouble compiling MySQL
and PHP - these are not exactly unusual or esoteric packages. The very
fact that they are listed in the ports tree should indicate that they
are meant to work - otherwise they're not ports! If I'm having trouble
compiling them on a comparatively clean system, how on earth are they
expected to compile on more established systems?

Since I had this problem, I have managed to compile several PERL modules
successfully, so it's not my compiler setup.

The trouble I had with pth is also very suspicious - a version from the
ports tree would not compile, but a copy direct from the maintainer of
that port compiled with no problems. He told me that the two versions
were the same (same version numbers), but clearly they were not as only
one worked.

OpenBSD 2.9-current (dave) #1: Sun Aug 12 11:30:34 CDT 2001

cpu0: AMD Athlon Model 4 (Thunderbird) ("AuthenticAMD" 686-class) 850
MHz
cpu0:
FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,SYS,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR
real mem  = 536457216 (523884K)
avail mem = 494206976 (482624K)

Perhaps the CVS tag on your ports checkout is incorrect.  Suggest you
rm -rf /usr/ports, after saving distfiles and packages somewhere else,
and CVS checkout a new set of ports appropriate to the date of your
basic system.

As you can see, my system is -current as of last Sunday and the system
and ports tree are in synch.

There does remain the possibility that the mysql port had some problems
with it at the time you checked out your ports.  In that case, set your
tag to OPENBSD_2_9_TRACKING_SWITCH and do your CVS checkout.