Hi Michael,
I obtained the configure created by the autoreconf etc and I have found the error. Here is the affected line 18710
18706 if test "x$ac_ct_CC" = x; then 18707 CC="" 18708 else 18709 case $cross_compiling:$ac_tool_warned in 18710 yes: 18711 18712 { printf "%s\n" "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: WARNING: using cross tools not prefixed with host triplet" >&5 18713 printf "%s\n" "$as_me: WARNING: using cross tools not prefixed with host triplet" >&2;} 18714 ac_tool_warned=yes ;; 18715 esac 18716 CC=$ac_ct_CC 18717 fi 18718 else 18719 CC="$ac_cv_prog_CC" 18720 fi
That line should be yes:) so it is missing a right bracket. Not sure if you can figure where and why that is occurring but presumably a patch can be written to be applied after the autoreconf etc and before the ./configure command
Regards, Adolf.
On 19/11/2024 12:41, Michael Tremer wrote:
Hello Adolf,
In the build script we are running autoreconf which will regenerate the configure script:
https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=blob;f=lfs/collectd;h=d1d4ea72138...
Is there any output of that command? There should be some warnings which might help us to find out what we need to change.
On 13 Nov 2024, at 10:30, Adolf Belka adolf.belka@ipfire.org wrote:
Hi All,
I did an update run with autoconf taking it from 2.71 to 2.72
autoconf built without any problems, however collectd then failed for a syntax error in the configure file.
Confirmed that this was due to autoconf by changing the versions back and forward and the problem went away and then came back again.
The collectd build error message is
checking for size_t... yes checking for uid_t... yes checking for gid_t... yes ./configure: line 18710: syntax error near unexpected token `newline' ./configure: line 18710: `yes:' make: *** [collectd:120: /usr/src/log/collectd-4.10.9] Error 2
The section around line 18710 in the configure file is
18707 do : 18708 as_ac_Header=`$as_echo "ac_cv_header_$ac_header" | $as_tr_sh` 18709 ac_fn_c_check_header_mongrel "$LINENO" "$ac_header" "$as_ac_Header" "$ac_includes_default" 18710 if eval test "x$"$as_ac_Header"" = x"yes"; then :
There is an extra : here which is probably what causes the syntax error.
18711 cat >>confdefs.h <<_ACEOF 18712 #define `$as_echo "HAVE_$ac_header" | $as_tr_cpp` 1 18713 _ACEOF 18714 18715 else 18716 with_libiptc="no (header file missing)" 18717 fi
However there are 15 occurrences of the exact same text as line 18710 in the configure file so I am not convinced if that line is the root cause for the syntax error but some other earlier error that causes a knock-on effect.
However, my knowledge of the coding syntax is definitely not enough to figure out what needs to be fixed/changed.
As collectd is a very old version it is likely that some structural coding or syntax was fine in the past but now with the change from autoconf-2.71 to 2.72 it is no longer allowed, or is flagged up when in the past it was just ignored.
There are quite a few changes in autoconf-2.72 with some being marked as backwards compatibilities. All of them except one say that existing configure scripts will continue working. The one that doesn't mention that is the following change:-
Configure scripts no longer support pre-1989 C compilers. Specifically, compilers that *only* implement the original “K&R” function definition syntax, and not the newer “prototyped” syntax, will not be able to parse the test programs now emitted by AC_CHECK_FUNC, AC_LANG_CALL, and similar macros. AC_PROG_CC still accepts such compilers, but this may change in the near future.
This change was necessary in order to support the upcoming 2024 edition of the C standard (often referred to as “C23”), which will officially remove the function declaration syntax used by AC_CHECK_FUNC in Autoconf 2.71 and earlier. We feel that support for compilers that support only C 2024 is more useful, nowadays, than support for compilers that don’t implement a core feature of C 1989.
However I am unable to figure out from this if the problem I am experiencing is related to this or not. I would not have thought so as I don't believe we are using a pre-1989 C compiler.
Any ideas from anyone on how to fix this issue?
There is nothing critical from a security or other vulnerability aspect in autoconf-2.72 but it would be nice to figure this out before we get to a stage where it has to be made to work.
Regards,
Adolf.