Bug 1467703 - mariadb library upgrade to 10.2 causes dspam FTBFS
Summary: mariadb library upgrade to 10.2 causes dspam FTBFS
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: dspam
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nathanael Noblet
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1467297
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-07-04 16:42 UTC by Augusto Caringi
Modified: 2017-07-17 16:35 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-07-17 16:35:13 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Patch to allow compilation of dspam with MariaDB 10.2 (2.28 KB, patch)
2017-07-04 16:42 UTC, Augusto Caringi
no flags Details | Diff

Description Augusto Caringi 2017-07-04 16:42:28 UTC
Created attachment 1294295 [details]
Patch to allow compilation of dspam with MariaDB 10.2

Trying to build dspam with the new version of MariaDB 10.2 causes an error in the configure script:

configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/dspam-3.10.2':
configure: error: Unsupported version of MySQL (no PROTOCOL_VERSION or ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK or ER_LOCK_WAIT_TIMEOUT or ER_LOCK_OR_ACTIVE_TRANSACTION or CR_ERROR_FIRST defined)

The cause is that CR_ERROR_FIRST is no longer present in this new version of the library. I attached a patch proposal to fix the problem.

We are tracking all the possible problems regarding this MariaDB upgrade in the bug 1467297.

Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/db-sig/mariadb-10.2/package/dspam/

Comment 1 Nathanael Noblet 2017-07-04 16:48:35 UTC
I don't mind applying the patch. I don't use this project much anymore so I'm wondering why all the failures are in the configure/m4 files. Why test for this but not use anything in C? Should this really be all there is to it?

Comment 2 Augusto Caringi 2017-07-10 16:23:54 UTC
(In reply to Nathanael Noblet from comment #1)
> I don't mind applying the patch. I don't use this project much anymore so
> I'm wondering why all the failures are in the configure/m4 files. Why test
> for this but not use anything in C? Should this really be all there is to it?

Good question... But it seems that the only define that is tested and not used is CR_ERROR_FIRST, and it's exactly with this define the problem.
What do the developers say about that?

Comment 3 Nathanael Noblet 2017-07-16 03:44:37 UTC
Unfortunately, upstream development is basically dead. It was a fantastic spam system. No idea why it never got more popular than spam assassin and friends. I've applied the patch and sent a build.

Comment 4 Nathanael Noblet 2017-07-17 16:35:13 UTC
The new build completed successfully.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.