net-snmp-config --base-lib-cflags is broken

Bug #1513569 reported by Ignacy Gawędzki on 2015-11-05
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
net-snmp (Ubuntu)
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

The --base-lib-cflags option to net-snmp-config added by Debian developers is broken as it outputs @LIBCFLAGS@ among others.

The problem comes from the fact that when it was introduced (version 5.4.2.1~dsfg-4), the original patch modified the configure.in file as well. In the meantime, the structure of configure.ac has changed and when the patch was adapted, the modification to configure.ac was dropped, resulting in a substitution left aside.

The attached patch is an attempt to restore the original behavior. It is meant as a replacement of debian/patches/62_add_lib_cflags.patch .

Nevertheless, the way information output by net-snmp-config --base-lib-cflags is gathered is wrong. There shouldn't IMHO be any GCC optimization flags like -O2 in the substitution, among others. The variable to substitute @LIBCFLAGS@ should be carefully constructed during the configure process instead.

Ignacy Gawędzki (iazz) wrote :

The attachment "Replacement patch proposition." seems to be a patch. If it isn't, please remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the "patch" tag, and if you are a member of the ~ubuntu-reviewers, unsubscribe the team.

[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by ~brian-murray, for any issues please contact him.]

tags: added: patch
Robie Basak (racb) wrote :

Thanks, this sounds reasonable. I'd prefer to send this to Debian to minimise our delta in Ubuntu, so this needs checking and forwarding to Debian if appropriate.

tags: added: needs-upstream-report
Changed in net-snmp (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Medium

Hi,
I'm walking through bugs that were dormant for too long to make sure they are not totally forgotten and try to resolve why there was no activity.

For this one I'd guess that Ubuntu waits for it to be reported to Debian, which didn't happen. It is always better if that is done by the reporter because he is the best to answer any details.

I feel bad that this was lying around for so long especially since you provided the debugging and a patch, but I really think that - following Robies argument - that should be addressed in Debian and then picked - and the lack thereof is the reason it was dormant.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers