Hi all

Trying to rebuild postgresql-8.3beta2-1PGDG.f7.src.rpm on my Centos 5.0 x86_64, I get the error "your platform is not thread safe" during config. When I use the --enable-thread-safety-force option, the build fails with the message
undefined reference to pthread_sigmask
during the libpq compile.

Is this a known issue? Is there a library I should install? Is there a workaround?
Regards
--Marcel

Search Discussions

  • Tom Lane at Nov 10, 2007 at 8:05 pm

    "Marcel Gsteiger" <Marcel.Gsteiger@milprog.ch> writes:
    Trying to rebuild postgresql-8.3beta2-1PGDG.f7.src.rpm on my Centos 5.0 x86_64, I get the error "your platform is not thread safe" during config. When I use the --enable-thread-safety-force option, the build fails with the message
    undefined reference to pthread_sigmask
    during the libpq compile.
    Do you have glibc-devel installed? It sounds like you might be missing
    /usr/lib64/libpthread.so, which is in that RPM. However, we do
    BuildRequire glibc-devel, so I'm not sure how you managed to try to
    build the RPM without it.

    regards, tom lane
  • Marcel Gsteiger at Nov 10, 2007 at 10:00 pm

    Trying to rebuild postgresql-8.3beta2-1PGDG.f7.src.rpm on my Centos 5.0 x86_64, I get the error "your platform is not thread safe" during config. When I use the --enable-thread-safety-force option, the build fails with the message
    undefined reference to pthread_sigmask
    during the libpq compile.
    Do you have glibc-devel installed? It sounds like you might be missing
    /usr/lib64/libpthread.so, which is in that RPM. However, we do
    BuildRequire glibc-devel, so I'm not sure how you managed to try to
    build the RPM without it.
    glibc-devel-2.5-12 is installed, /usr/lib64/libpthread.so exists. This is a very basic CentOS 5 x86_64 install from DVD, 'yum update' afterwards. I only installed the packages that were in the BuildRequire list of the SRPM. I would like to set up this box just for testing my 8.1 and 8.2 database apps against the new version.

    Pls let me know if you need some files in the BUILD directory (e.g. config.log).

    My only diff from the original SPEC file is:

    308c308
    < %configure --disable-rpath --enable-thread-safety-force \
    ---
    %configure --disable-rpath \
    Regards
    --Marcel
  • Tom Lane at Nov 10, 2007 at 10:54 pm

    "Marcel Gsteiger" <Marcel.Gsteiger@milprog.ch> writes:
    Do you have glibc-devel installed? It sounds like you might be missing
    /usr/lib64/libpthread.so, which is in that RPM. However, we do
    BuildRequire glibc-devel, so I'm not sure how you managed to try to
    build the RPM without it.
    glibc-devel-2.5-12 is installed, /usr/lib64/libpthread.so exists. This
    is a very basic CentOS 5 x86_64 install from DVD, 'yum update'
    afterwards. I only installed the packages that were in the
    BuildRequire list of the SRPM.
    Hmm. I suspect either we're short a BuildRequire or two, or you missed
    something that's considered part of the standard minimum build
    environment. The "exceptions" list on this page shows what Red Hat
    considers the core set of packages that needn't be BuildRequire'd:

    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions

    However, none of those look particularly likely to result in the
    failure you're seeing here :-(. Could you send along the config.log
    output?

    regards, tom lane
  • Marcel Gsteiger at Nov 11, 2007 at 7:00 am

    Do you have glibc-devel installed? It sounds like you might be missing
    /usr/lib64/libpthread.so, which is in that RPM. However, we do
    BuildRequire glibc-devel, so I'm not sure how you managed to try to
    build the RPM without it.
    glibc-devel-2.5-12 is installed, /usr/lib64/libpthread.so exists. This
    is a very basic CentOS 5 x86_64 install from DVD, 'yum update'
    afterwards. I only installed the packages that were in the
    BuildRequire list of the SRPM.
    Hmm. I suspect either we're short a BuildRequire or two, or you missed
    something that's considered part of the standard minimum build
    environment. The "exceptions" list on this page shows what Red Hat
    considers the core set of packages that needn't be BuildRequire'd:
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions
    However, none of those look particularly likely to result in the
    failure you're seeing here :-(. Could you send along the config.log
    output?
    Thanks for your tip. In fact, my "basic packages, customize later"-type install from DVD did not install the following packages from the mentioned list:

    gcc-c++
    libstdc++-devel
    redhat-rpm-config

    After I have installed these, everything now works perfectly.

    regards
    --Marcel
  • Tom Lane at Nov 11, 2007 at 3:19 pm

    "Marcel Gsteiger" <Marcel.Gsteiger@milprog.ch> writes:
    Hmm. I suspect either we're short a BuildRequire or two, or you missed
    something that's considered part of the standard minimum build
    environment. The "exceptions" list on this page shows what Red Hat
    considers the core set of packages that needn't be BuildRequire'd:
    However, none of those look particularly likely to result in the
    failure you're seeing here :-(. Could you send along the config.log
    output?
    Thanks for your tip. In fact, my "basic packages, customize later"-type install from DVD did not install the following packages from the mentioned list:
    gcc-c++
    libstdc++-devel
    redhat-rpm-config
    After I have installed these, everything now works perfectly.
    Interesting. We don't do any C++ stuff, so I would hope that the first
    two of those are irrelevant. redhat-rpm-config, however, might well be
    relevant. I remember Devrim running into an odd build failure on a
    machine where it wasn't installed.

    I wonder if it'd be worth explicitly BuildRequire'ing redhat-rpm-config
    in the PGDG SRPM? I don't feel the need to do it in Fedora/RHEL,
    because as mentioned there's an explicit policy not to for those
    projects. But it seems the PGDG RPMs get rebuilt in a rather wider
    variety of environments.

    regards, tom lane
  • Devrim GÃNDÃZ at Nov 11, 2007 at 8:44 pm
    Hi,
    On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 10:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
    After I have installed these, everything now works perfectly.
    Interesting. We don't do any C++ stuff, so I would hope that the
    first two of those are irrelevant. Exactly.
    redhat-rpm-config, however, might well be relevant. I remember Devrim
    running into an odd build failure on a machine where it wasn't
    installed.
    Yes. All Fedora clones that are < 7 (CentOS 4,5 , RHEL 4,5 and Fedora
    <=6) have this problem.

    I have filed a bug report against this, and here is the reply (and bug
    was closed)

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=355551

    This is definitely a bug, but since this package is a must for building
    packages (see below), there is nothing we can do.
    I wonder if it'd be worth explicitly BuildRequire'ing
    redhat-rpm-config in the PGDG SRPM? I don't feel the need to do it in
    Fedora/RHEL, because as mentioned there's an explicit policy not to
    for those projects. But it seems the PGDG RPMs get rebuilt in a
    rather wider variety of environments.
    I did not add it since redhat-rpm-config is a must per:

    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-4cadce5e79d38a63cad3941de1dadc9d25d67d30-2

    (Of course I don't have to stick to Fedora guidelines for PGDG RPMs, but
    still...)

    But we can mention about that in README, etc.

    Regards,
    --
    Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE
    PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
    Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
    Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
  • Tom Lane at Nov 11, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= <devrim@CommandPrompt.com> writes:
    On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 10:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
    redhat-rpm-config, however, might well be relevant. I remember Devrim
    running into an odd build failure on a machine where it wasn't
    installed.
    Yes. All Fedora clones that are < 7 (CentOS 4,5 , RHEL 4,5 and Fedora
    <=6) have this problem.
    I have filed a bug report against this, and here is the reply (and bug
    was closed)
    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=355551
    Hmmm ... Panu has a point, I guess. His reasoning seems to be that
    redhat-rpm-config is required for sane behavior on RHEL/Fedora
    platforms, but it might not be required --- or even available --- on
    other RPM-using platforms, therefore it's not appropriate for either
    rpm-build or individual SRPMs to Require: it. It would seem to me,
    though, that that makes it a distribution bug: Red Hat distros should
    ensure that redhat-rpm-config is always installed. Otherwise it's
    possible to mis-build on Red Hat platforms, which is exactly what
    all the package-require infrastructure is supposed to prevent.
    *Somebody* other than the end user ought to be taking care of this.

    I've added a comment about this to the above BZ entry.

    regards, tom lane

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-ports @
categoriespostgresql
postedNov 10, '07 at 8:08a
activeNov 11, '07 at 9:55p
posts8
users3
websitepostgresql.org
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase