[ SOLVED ] x86_64 buildrequires

[AS]

Hi,

I'm trying to learn about packaging, Archie has been so kind to introduce to the argument, many thanks Archie!
I have already setup 2 build environments in vbox, for 32bit and 64bit, and have already re-packaged a couple of libraries in both environments.

Now I have a question, one specfile list:

BuildRequires:  libldap2.4_2-devel

once I installed libldap2.4_2-devel in the 32 bit environment all is fine, the package does build correctly.

The same package, while trying to build it in 64 bit environment, complain about the missing library (libldap2.4_2-devel), even if the library is correctly installed.

I was able to build the package modifying the library name to:

BuildRequires:  lib64ldap2.4_2-devel

Of course, this change will not be portable across the 32 and 64 bit environments.

What is needed to do here ? Is it an error in ldap2.4_2-devel library ?

Could be worked out with a conditional like this one:

%ifarch x86_64
BuildRequires:  lib64ldap2.4_2-devel
%else
BuildRequires:  libldap2.4_2-devel
%endif

Suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

AS

[Neal ManBear]

Archie is tutoring you? Woohoo!    
Use ---        

BuildRequires:  %{_lib}ldap2.4_2-devel

   

You can use this %{_lib} in most of your specs for "lib" packages. Using this, the library will be 'looked for' as 32bit in your 32bit environment and 64bit in your 64bit.    

Hey, Archie! I'm proud of you, man!    

[sammy2fish]

as, it sounds great how you're catching on.....!

Much as I wouldn't mind helping, it would never work.  Being dyslexic & add.  I don't even have the patience to play a klondike card game, or a checkers board game.

Too many variables to consider in making software stuff, or games to win.  Let me get my hands on wood & power-tools, and I feel at home.

[AS]

Archie is tutoring you? Woohoo!   

Yes, considering how much annoying could be ... he answered a lot of my newbie questions. 

Use ---       

BuildRequires:  %{_lib}ldap2.4_2-devel

     

You can use this %{_lib} in all your specs for "lib" packages. Using this, the library will be 'looked for' as 32bit in your 32bit environment and 64bit in your 64bit.

Many thanks Neal and Texstar!

as, it sounds great how you're catching on.....!

Thanks, I'm trying. Right now I'm only catching issues  hopefully in the near future ... 
Of course, each one of us has it's own skills and experience, and each one contribute it's own knowledge, don't underestimate your contribution on this forum, we appreciate it!   


Another question: discussing 64bit issue on forum is not allowed, testers-mailing list is only for testing.
Where should be discussed things like the "supposed" lack of a 64bit ".la" file ?  (file that is present in the 32bit version of the same library)

[Texstar]

We are dropping *.la files. If you run into linking errors simply type rm -rf /usr/lib64/*.la then start your build again.

[AS]

We are dropping *.la files. If you run into linking errors simply type rm -rf /usr/lib64/*.la then start your build again.

Great! Thanks again!

AS

[Neal ManBear]

Another question: discussing 64bit issue on forum is not allowed, testers-mailing list is only for testing.
Where should be discussed things like the "supposed" lack of a 64bit ".la" file ?  (file that is present in the 32bit version of the same library)

     
An exception: Packaging questions may be brought here to Packagers section.      

[AS]

Another question: discussing 64bit issue on forum is not allowed, testers-mailing list is only for testing.
Where should be discussed things like the "supposed" lack of a 64bit ".la" file ?  (file that is present in the 32bit version of the same library)

     
An exception: Packaging questions may be brought here to Packagers section.      

OK 

[Archie]

Archie is tutoring you? Woohoo!    
Use ---        

BuildRequires:  %{_lib}ldap2.4_2-devel

   

You can use this %{_lib} in most of your specs for "lib" packages. Using this, the library will be 'looked for' as 32bit in your 32bit environment and 64bit in your 64bit.    

Hey, Archie! I'm proud of you, man!    

I am learning just as much from AS. 

My "tutor" is just the skeleton format of our SPEC and how AS can implement his manual builds and install onto it.

I can't really take any credit for anything ... AS is one excellent troubleshooter, and I reckon would be a valuable addition to the team.

[Archie]

We are dropping *.la files. If you run into linking errors simply type rm -rf /usr/lib64/*.la then start your build again.

A little more elaborate would help me better understand.

A build looks for .la and exits. So we have the dev libs and/or libs with nos. Will simply running rm -rf /usr/lib64/*.la skip to linking with these instead?

[Neal ManBear]

I agree, AS is a great addition to the team, but don't sell yourself short. Remember that I have known you for years and know how tirelessly you have worked 'behind the scenes.'    

[Archie]

I agree, AS is a great addition to the team, but don't sell yourself short. Remember that I have known you for years and know how tirelessly you have worked 'behind the scenes.'      

Thank you for your valuable encouragement, Neal. And FWIW, I will always place a high value on many of the lessons I've learned from you. You are a GOOD ... GREAT teacher.

I owe it to you, to Tex and to the PCLOS community.

[Neal ManBear]

  Thanks, Archie. That means a lot to me.      
(a bit embarrassed by the praise)