emulators/virtualbox-ose build failure

Thanks for your reply. Here is the configuration:

Code: 
# make showconfig
===> The following configuration options are available for virtualbox-ose-4.3.28:
  DBUS=on: D-Bus IPC system support
  DEBUG=off: Debug symbols, additional logs and assertions
  GUESTADDITIONS=on: Build with Guest Additions
  MANUAL=off: Build with user manual
  NLS=on: Native Language Support
  PULSEAUDIO=off: PulseAudio sound server support
  PYTHON=on: Python bindings or support
  QT4=on: Build with QT4 Frontend
  UDPTUNNEL=on: Build with UDP tunnel support
  VDE=off: Build with VDE support
  VNC=on: Build with VNC support
  VPX=off: Use vpx for video capturing
  WEBSERVICE=on: Build Webservice
  X11=on: X11 (graphics) support
===> Use 'make config' to modify these settings
 
Thanks for your advice, I followed it, but unfortunately, the build breaks down at exactly the same place.
 
amnixed said:
Thank you all for your help. Got a little farther, but still no luck: http://pastebin.com/wwscmEz7
Click to expand...
Ok, that's a separate issue but at least we're further along. Since you're using ports, have you been updating this box consistently and following /usr/ports/UPDATING or has it been some time since you updated it last?

As a sidenote, ports-mgmt/portmaster is probably a better choice than ports-mgmt/portupgrade for updating ports. portmaster(8) is only a shell script with no dependencies and integrates with pkg(8) while portupgrade(1) depends on lang/ruby and uses it's own database which can sometimes cause problems.
 
protocelt said:
Ok, that's a separate issue but at least we're further along. Since you're using ports, have you been updating this box consistently and following /usr/ports/UPDATING or has it been some time since you updated it last?

As a sidenote, ports-mgmt/portmaster is probably a better choice than ports-mgmt/portupgrade for updating ports. portmaster(8) is only a shell script with no dependencies and integrates with pkg(8) while portupgrade(1) depends on lang/ruby and uses it's own database which can sometimes cause problems.
Click to expand...

Both of them use pkg(8) because make install on a port uses pkg register. The databases used by ports-mgmt/portupgrade do nothing to replace the functionality of pkg(8). The database is just a quick index to the ports tree and before the new pkg came along there was a similar database for /var/db/pkg that is no longer used.

That said, I agree that ports-mgmt/portmaster is the better choise now out of the two because the other one has become largely redundant because of pkg and portmaster has no dependencies.
 
protocelt said:
Ok, that's a separate issue but at least we're further along. Since you're using ports, have you been updating this box consistently and following /usr/ports/UPDATING or has it been some time since you updated it last?

As a sidenote, ports-mgmt/portmaster is probably a better choice than ports-mgmt/portupgrade for updating ports. portmaster(8) is only a shell script with no dependencies and integrates with pkg(8) while portupgrade(1) depends on lang/ruby and uses it's own database which can sometimes cause problems.
Click to expand...

As a rule, I always run portsnap(8) before using portupgrade(1), and first always upgrade ports-mgmt/pkg if there is an upgrade available, and then upgrade ports-mgmt/portupgrade if needed. What I have is:

Code: 
# portversion -vR pkg-1.5.3
[Reading data from pkg(8) ... - 753 packages found - done]
pkg-1.5.3  =  up-to-date with port

[root@lizard /usr/ports]# portversion -vR portupgrade-2.4.14,2
[Reading data from pkg(8) ... - 753 packages found - done]
portupgrade-2.4.14,2  =  up-to-date with port
ruby-2.1.6,1  =  up-to-date with port
ruby21-bdb5-0.6.6_4  =  up-to-date with port
 
Using either upgrade tool really comes down to a matter of preference. Both will work. I just find(and many others) portmaster(8) to be the better of the two.

You never mentioned if you have been following any relevant instructions in /usr/ports/UPDATING before updating. Not following that file each and every time you update can and will cause a ton of problems due to dependencies and libraries not being in sync as well as ports being removed or renamed. I just wanted to rule that out before going any further. :)
 
I must admit that I have not always read /usr/ports/UPDATING before updating. As a matter of fact, pkg_libchk(1) is reporting a few missing dependencies, let me fix these.
 
protocelt said:
Using either upgrade tool really comes down to a matter of preference. Both will work. I just find(and many others) portmaster(8) to be the better of the two.

You never mentioned if you have been following any relevant instructions in /usr/ports/UPDATING before updating. Not following that file each and every time you update can and will cause a ton of problems due to dependencies and libraries not being in sync as well as ports being removed or renamed. I just wanted to rule that out before going any further. :)
Click to expand...

I have fixed the problems indicated by pkg_libchk(1) with the exception of these:

Code: 
# pkg_libchk
virtualbox-ose-4.3.10: /usr/local/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSDL.so misses libSDL-1.2.so.11
virtualbox-ose-4.3.10: /usr/local/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSVC misses libpng15.so.15
virtualbox-ose-4.3.10: /usr/local/lib/virtualbox/components/VBoxC.so misses libpng15.so.15

OF course I couldn't fix the above, because building emulators/virtualbox-ose fails again with "bad C++ code".

Is there anything else I can try?
 
Sorry for the late reply. Life and all that. :) I can't reproduce this on my machine. What do you have in your /etc/make.conf file?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top