Community Packages

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#16121 - [pulseaudio] PKGBUILD doesn't quite work

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Thursday, 10 September 2009, 04:11 GMT
Last edited by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Sunday, 03 January 2010, 15:09 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category
Status Closed
Assigned To Corrado Primier (bardo)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Firstly, there's no "Packages: Community" category; it probably should be added to the list.

The PulseAudio PKGBUILD doesn't quite work; so, I've made a few fixes. Please use the attached PKGBUILD, from now on.
   PKGBUILD (2.4 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Ionut Biru (wonder)
Sunday, 03 January 2010, 15:09 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  in 0.9.21-1
Comment by Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi (djgera) - Thursday, 10 September 2009, 04:28 GMT
  • Field changed: Attached to Project (Arch Linux → Community Packages)
...but there is a project "Community Packages" ;)
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Saturday, 12 September 2009, 10:58 GMT
I'm in the process of building and testing pulseaudio 0.9.17. Could you please elaborate more on "doesn't quite work"? As far as I know, modules go to the right directory, they install in the destdir, get copied to the prefix when installing the package and work out of the box. What exactly is your problem?
Comment by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Sunday, 13 September 2009, 06:11 GMT
Here, it refused to copy the modules to the destination directory; hence, the addition of the 'sed' lines. Also, your PKGBUILD doesn't create the "/etc/pulse/" directory, prior to the 'echo' line.
Comment by Swift Geek (swiftgeek) - Monday, 21 September 2009, 03:36 GMT
Stable release 0.9.18 / 2009-9-19; 11 hours ago
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Tuesday, 06 October 2009, 23:46 GMT
I think there are some problems with your build system: I tested building in a clean chroot and everything worked fine for every version between 0.9.15 and 0.9.19 (which is actualli in [community-testing], at least for x86_64). Modules were correctly installed, and pulse works as expected.

About the /etc/pulse question, there's no error: in ./configure I specify --sysconfdir=/etc and when 'make install' is executed, it gets created (quite obviously: it copies there default.pa, client.conf and the rest). So the echo line will work. If you don't even get /etc/pulse created, then you definitely have issues with your PKGBUILD/build system.
Comment by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Monday, 16 November 2009, 11:04 GMT
I receive a new error when I attempt to build v0.9.19.
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Monday, 16 November 2009, 11:12 GMT
(I'm about to move 0.9.20, but there are no PKGBUILD changes, just changed $pkgver and it still builds fine.)

What kind of error are you getting? And again, are you using a clean chroot? Are you on i686 or on x86_64?
I'm tempted to close this bug again, you still don't explain what are your problems, and give no details about your setup.
Comment by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Monday, 16 November 2009, 20:23 GMT
So that I could attach the building error, I decided to wait for the bug report to reopen, before providing further information.

The building error is listed in the attached text file. I've not been using a clean 'chroot', because I want to avoid building with root privileges; you're welcome to let me know how I can get around this. I'm on an 'i686' machine and all of my other packages build correctly.
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Wednesday, 18 November 2009, 23:47 GMT
try adding before ./configure unset LDFLAGS
Comment by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Thursday, 19 November 2009, 07:24 GMT
After I added "unset LDFLAGS" between the "autoreconf" and "configure" lines, the package built successfully! For the benefit of others, perhaps the maintainer should also make this change to the PKGBUILD.
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Thursday, 19 November 2009, 12:36 GMT
Sorry for my harsh reply before, it really was unrequested. I'm a bit busy at the moment, and I'm not still convinced of the right solution, but I'll make a decision shortly. It's true that removing the --as-needed linker flag lets the package build, but it's also true that the problem doesn't exist in a clean chroot. It's some sort of library dependency cycle that I hope to sort out in a short time.

By the way, there's nothing wrong in building as root if using mkarchroot/makechrootpkg, which ensures nothing gets out of it. This is especially true if you rebuild a package you probably also installed in binary form, which could have any instruction in .install files :)
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Thursday, 19 November 2009, 12:56 GMT
bardo are you sure that you merged makepkg.conf from your clean chroot? i do have that problem.

also you might want to add -fno-strict-aliasing to CFLAGS to fix warnings about: "dereferencing pointer $something does break strict-aliasing rules"
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Thursday, 19 November 2009, 14:17 GMT
wonder, I am sure that it's ok, I always merge conf files whene there's the need, and makepkg.conf is the only one I customized in the chroot:

[root@forty-two ~]# grep LDFLAGS /home/bardo/tu/chroot/root/etc/makepkg.conf
LDFLAGS="-Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--as-needed"

Works like a charm, on both architectures.

Is there a real need to remove strict aliasing or is it just a cosmetic option? Because if it only suppresses the warnings, then I'd prefer to keep it turned on, I don't want to hide anything in the build process.
Comment by Ionut Biru (wonder) - Thursday, 19 November 2009, 14:24 GMT
sometimes strict-aliasing can break functionality. a good example is  FS#15189 
Comment by Yaro Kasear (Yaro) - Saturday, 21 November 2009, 02:51 GMT
My experience with Pulse Audio has been nothing but negative. You'd probably have a better time of improving your sound with OSSv4 or just sticking with ALSA. Of course, I hate PA so much I think the whole thing should be chucked into [unsupported] and abandoned. Biggest sound regression in Linux history. One of the biggest reasons I left Ubuntu for Arch.
Comment by Corrado Primier (bardo) - Saturday, 21 November 2009, 09:37 GMT
Conrad, thanks for your opinion. This is not a discussion forum, though, we're here to solve bugs, and if you don't want to use PA, then don't install it, it's as simple as that. Believe me, it is much harder to maintain it properly than to use it and it already takes a big chunk of the time I can dedicate on arch. Comments like yours (in the wrong place) take just more time I (we) could dedicate to make a better distro, and PA won't go away because you don't like it.
Comment by Chris Giles (Chris.Giles) - Saturday, 21 November 2009, 10:58 GMT
Thanks for giving up some of your free time to maintain PulseAudio on Arch Linux. I'm actually a big fan and I think that it should be moved into the 'extra' repository relatively soon.

Loading...