[blfs-dev] Problem lua-5.2.3 with Readline-6.3 and Ncurses-5.9

Fernando de Oliveira famobr at yahoo.com.br
Sun Jun 8 10:52:25 PDT 2014


Em 07-06-2014 14:58, William Harrington escreveu:
> 
> On May 14, 2014, at 3:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> 
>> Log further below.
>>
>> Error when building lua.
>>
>> I needed to use
>>
>> sed -i 's/-lreadline/-lreadline -lncurses/' src/Makefile
>>
>> (I prefer to explicitly repeat the search string, if it is not too
>> large).
>>
>> Is it just me, or I should fix the book?
> 
> Greetings Fernando. I ran into this as well. I rarely build LUA, but I
> decided and built today.
> 
> The problem is with the new Readline 6.3 build. 6.2 is fine.
> If you do this with an LFS build before Readline 6.3 was introduced:
> 
> readelf -d /lib/libreadline.so.6.3 | grep NEEDED
> 
> should output:
>  0x00000001 (NEEDED)                     Shared library: [libncursesw.so.5]
>  0x00000001 (NEEDED)                     Shared library: [libc.so.6]
> 
> But with our current builds of readline 6.3 we only get:
> 
>  0x00000001 (NEEDED)                     Shared library: [libncursesw.so.5]
> 
> One way to fix this is to add --disable-static
> 
> The other way is to include SHLIB_LIBS=-lncurses during the make install
> of readline.
> 
> Read the following bug report as to why this is happening with Readline
> 6.3:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-readline/2014-03/msg00005.html
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> William Harrington
> 

Thank you very much, William, for confirming that the problem was really
with readline.

The thread in bug-readline is very enlightening. Indeed, I built using
jhalfs with "N_PARALLEL=4", which means, make -j4.

Just recalling that had the same problem with js-17.0.0, which made me
revert a modification in lua:

http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/changeset/13114/trunk/BOOK/general/prog/lua.xml

I'm sending, after this, a message to lfs dev, for consideration of the
necessary modifications. My impression, particularly, is that
SHLIB_LIBS=-lncurses in make install would be the better choice, because
it is explicit and for symmetry with make.

-- 
[]s,
Fernando


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list