libdb detection with gcc 5.1.1

[Michael Ströder]

HI!

This seems to be already fixed:

ITS#8056: libdb detection with gcc 5

But gcc-5.1.1 arrived on openSUSE Tumbleweed and now libdb detection fails:

checking db.h usability... yes
checking db.h presence... yes
checking for db.h... yes
checking for Berkeley DB major version in db.h... none
configure: error: Unknown Berkeley DB major version in db.h

From config.log:

configure:20300: checking db.h usability
configure:20300: cc -c -g -O0 -DSLAP_SCHEMA_EXPOSE
-DLDAP_COLLECTIVE_ATTRIBUTES -DSLAP_CONFIG_DELETE -I/usr/include
-I/usr/include -I/usr/include -I/usr/include conftest.c >&5
configure:20300: $? = 0
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20300: checking db.h presence
configure:20300: cc -E -I/usr/include -I/usr/include -I/usr/include
-I/usr/include conftest.c
configure:20300: $? = 0
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20300: checking for db.h
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20311: checking for Berkeley DB major version in db.h
configure:20331: result: none
configure:20334: error: Unknown Berkeley DB major version in db.h

Any clue?

Ciao, Michael.

[Aaron Richton]

Content preview: On Sat, 4 Jul 2015, Michael Str?der wrote: > HI! > > This
seems to be already fixed: > > ITS#8056: libdb detection with gcc 5 > > But
gcc-5.1.1 arrived on openSUSE Tumbleweed and now libdb detection fails: [...]


Content analysis details: (-1.9 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: gnu.org]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]

Post by Michael Ströder
HI!
ITS#8056: libdb detection with gcc 5

Bottom line, set CPP='cpp -P' during configure. (Dunno why the m4 patch
didn't take if you're on a patched copy; perhaps autoconf needs to be
re-run...)


details:

gcc added cpp -P with behavior of traditional cpp -E, and changed cpp -E
to emit detailed line number information (desirable when debugging complex
macros etc.). This confuses autoconf.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191098

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64864

Post by Michael Ströder
checking db.h usability... yes
checking db.h presence... yes
checking for db.h... yes
checking for Berkeley DB major version in db.h... none
configure: error: Unknown Berkeley DB major version in db.h
configure:20300: checking db.h usability
configure:20300: cc -c -g -O0 -DSLAP_SCHEMA_EXPOSE
-DLDAP_COLLECTIVE_ATTRIBUTES -DSLAP_CONFIG_DELETE -I/usr/include
-I/usr/include -I/usr/include -I/usr/include conftest.c >&5
configure:20300: $? = 0
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20300: checking db.h presence
configure:20300: cc -E -I/usr/include -I/usr/include -I/usr/include
-I/usr/include conftest.c
configure:20300: $? = 0
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20300: checking for db.h
configure:20300: result: yes
configure:20311: checking for Berkeley DB major version in db.h
configure:20331: result: none
configure:20334: error: Unknown Berkeley DB major version in db.h
Any clue?
Ciao, Michael.

[Michael Ströder]

Post by Michael Ströder
HI!
ITS#8056: libdb detection with gcc 5

Bottom line, set CPP='cpp -P' during configure. (Dunno why the m4 patch didn't
take if you're on a patched copy; perhaps autoconf needs to be re-run...)

Sigh! Yes, re-running autoconf fixes it.

Also fixes Factory builds here:

https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:stroeder:branches:network:ldap/openldap2

Normally when packaging software running autoconf on release tar-balls is
considered rather bad practice.

Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP release?

Ciao, Michael.

[Quanah Gibson-Mount]

Content preview: --On Saturday, July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder
<***@stroeder.com> wrote: > Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP
release? First step would be to file an ITS. Please do so. :) [...]

Content analysis details: (-2.0 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[162.209.122.184 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: zimbra.com]
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
Cc: "OpenLDAP-***@openldap.org" <openldap-***@OpenLDAP.org>
X-BeenThere: openldap-***@openldap.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OpenLDAP development discussion list <openldap-devel.openldap.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/options/openldap-devel>,
<mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:openldap-***@openldap.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/listinfo/openldap-devel>,
<mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: openldap-devel-***@openldap.org
Sender: "openldap-devel" <openldap-devel-***@openldap.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "gauss.openldap.net", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview: --On Saturday, July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder
<***@stroeder.com> wrote: > Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP
release? First step would be to file an ITS. Please do so. :) [...]

Content analysis details: (-2.0 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[162.209.122.184 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: zimbra.com]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

--On Saturday, July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder

Post by Michael Ströder
Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP release?

First step would be to file an ITS. Please do so. :)

--Quanah


--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

[Michael Ströder]

--On Saturday, July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder

Post by Michael Ströder
Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP release?

First step would be to file an ITS. Please do so. :)

http://www.openldap.org/its/index.cgi?findid=8189

Ciao, Michael.

[Quanah Gibson-Mount]

Content preview: --On Monday, July 06, 2015 7:21 PM +0200 Michael Ströder
<***@stroeder.com> wrote: > Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: >> --On Saturday,
July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder >> >>> Wouldn't this justify
to re-roll a OpenLDAP release? >> >> First step would be to file an ITS.
Please do so. :) > > http://www.openldap.org/its/index.cgi?findid�89 [...]


Content analysis details: (-2.0 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[162.209.122.184 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: openldap.org]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
Cc: "OpenLDAP-***@openldap.org" <openldap-***@OpenLDAP.org>
X-BeenThere: openldap-***@openldap.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OpenLDAP development discussion list <openldap-devel.openldap.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/options/openldap-devel>,
<mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:openldap-***@openldap.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/listinfo/openldap-devel>,
<mailto:openldap-devel-***@openldap.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: openldap-devel-***@openldap.org
Sender: "openldap-devel" <openldap-devel-***@openldap.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "gauss.openldap.net", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview: --On Monday, July 06, 2015 7:21 PM +0200 Michael Ströder
<***@stroeder.com> wrote: > Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: >> --On Saturday,
July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder >> >>> Wouldn't this justify
to re-roll a OpenLDAP release? >> >> First step would be to file an ITS.
Please do so. :) > > http://www.openldap.org/its/index.cgi?findid�89 [...]


Content analysis details: (-2.0 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[162.209.122.184 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: openldap.org]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

--On Monday, July 06, 2015 7:21 PM +0200 Michael Ströder

Post by Michael Ströder

Post by Quanah Gibson-Mount
--On Saturday, July 04, 2015 6:27 PM +0200 Michael Ströder

Post by Michael Ströder
Wouldn't this justify to re-roll a OpenLDAP release?

First step would be to file an ITS. Please do so. :)

http://www.openldap.org/its/index.cgi?findid=8189

Yeah, I spoke too soon. This is actually ITS#8056, I just missed the need
to regenerate configure.

--Quanah


--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration