Bob Stia wrote:
> Out of curiousity, doing a locate on config.sub & config.guess turned up about
> a dozen different ones associated with different packages. I guess wget only
> changed those files in that particular app?
>
Per the "Goat Training Book" (Gnu Autoconf, Automake, and Libtool) from
New Riders, page 351:
'config.guess' and 'config.sub'
The versions of 'config.guess' and 'config.sub' installed difference
between releases of Automake
and Litool, and might be different depending on whether libtoolize
is used to install them.
Before releasing your own package, you should get the latest
versions of these files from
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/config, in case there have been changes since
releases of the GNU
Autoutils
My experience has been that projects are packaged to assume a certain
version of automake/autoconf/libtool. As time marches forward, developer
systems usually have a newer versions of those tools installed. Most
distributions contain multiple version of automake (usually at least 1.4
and 1.9) and autoconf (usually 2.13 and 2.59) so they can build both
older and newer source bases based on what appear to be incompatible
autoconf configurations.
My newest laptop is an x86_64, the first machine I've attempted to build
and maintain as x86_64 native. As such, I am experiencing the same
"pain" as you are. Many packages are built with versions of
autoconf/automake that are not familiar with the x86_64 architecture,
much less able to build 64bit native versions. In many cases, I can
merely update 'config.sub' and 'config.guess' and the packages build (as
they can now comprehend the x86_64 architecture).
In some cases, the source simply isn't 64bit safe, and you must hunt
down a newer development tree of that source base in hopes of finding a
version that is.
Simply put, the source _must_ be 64bit safe. It must be aware of
building in a 64bit environment.
Your package, ACE 2.0, appears to be a virtual private server
administration harness released back on 05/09/2000. That was 6 years
ago. I'll wager that the source isn't 64bit safe.
Are you attempting to host FreeBSD VPSes? Or just looking for an
administration harness for Linux VPSes? There are a number of other
alternatives out there, including OpenVCP and OpenQRM, not to mention
OpenVPS and the goodness that is OpenVZ.
I've written a homegrown management harness for our VPS farm, though I'm
always eyeing the public projects looking to graft in the good bits.
- Ian C. Blenke <ian@blenke.com> http://ian.blenke.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 14:47:46 EDT