Hi,

I ran the program in scratchbox, but the program blocks....it doesn't come
out at all !
Seems to be a scratchbox bug.

Thaks all of you.

Regards,
Harshad

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Yang Tse <yangsita_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/6/16, harshadnatiye_at_gmail.com wrote
>
> > Attached is the o/p of the "./configure >scratchbox.log 2>&1"
> > The process gets blocked at "checking if getifaddrs seems to work..."
>
> Quoting some lines from your log file...
>
> > [...]
> > checking build system type... arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
> > checking host system type... arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
> > [...]
> > checking whether we are cross compiling... no
> > [...]
> > checking if getaddrinfo can be linked... yes
> > checking if getaddrinfo is prototyped... yes
> > checking if getaddrinfo is compilable... yes
> > checking if getaddrinfo seems to work... yes
> > checking if getaddrinfo usage allowed... yes
> > checking if getaddrinfo might be used... yes
> > [...]
> > checking if getifaddrs can be linked... yes
> > checking if getifaddrs is prototyped... yes
> > checking if getifaddrs is compilable... yes
> > checking if getifaddrs seems to work...
>
> As Daniel has said this pretty much looks like a scratchbox bug somewhere.
>
> What I am understanding is that your ARM scratchbox on linux
> environment is pretending to be an ARM environment in which you can
> actually build and run ARM code.
>
> From your log file the configure script also thinks the same and
> assumes that it is not performing a cross-compilation.
>
> I've quoted the getaddrinfo() function detection from the configure
> script due to the fact that it actually executes a small program which
> uses getaddrinfo() and as far as the configure script can detect it
> seems to succeed.
>
> So, focusing on the getifaddrs() function I advise you to compile and
> try to run the following snippet as a standalone program. See what
> happens and report back, at least to satisfy my curiosity since most
> probably the fix will come from the scratchbox camp.
>
> Additionally I've found what seems a, quite nasty, scratchbox bug
> report
> http://lists.scratchbox.org/pipermail/scratchbox-devel/2008-December/000425.html
> I don't know if it is a valid report or not, but if the shell is not
> minimally conformant autotools and derivatives will have serious
> problems running on it.
>
> Here's the snippet you'll have to compile/test/debug...
> --------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <sys/socket.h>
> #include <netinet/in.h>
> #include <ifaddrs.h>
>
> int main (void)
> {
> struct ifaddrs *ifa = 0;
> int error;
> error = getifaddrs(&ifa);
> if(error || !ifa)
> exit(1); /* fail */
> else
> exit(0);
> }
> --------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------
> --
> -=[Yang]=-
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/curl-users
> FAQ: http://curl.haxx.se/docs/faq.html
> Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/curl-users
FAQ: http://curl.haxx.se/docs/faq.html
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2009-06-19