Bug 3569 - [review] build parameters not passed to spamc configure
Summary: [review] build parameters not passed to spamc configure
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Spamassassin
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Building & Packaging (show other bugs)
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Hardware: Other other
: P5 blocker
Target Milestone: 3.0.0
Assignee: SpamAssassin Developer Mailing List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-07-05 23:21 UTC by Sidney Markowitz
Modified: 2004-07-06 00:32 UTC (History)
0 users


Attachment Type Modified Status Actions Submitter/CLA Status
patch against configure.pl and Makefile.PL patch None Malte S. Stretz [HasCLA]
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Sidney Markowitz 2004-07-05 23:21:49 UTC 
I tried perl Makefile.PL ENABLE_SSL=yes and discovered that spamc was built
without ssl. The problem is in spamc/configure.pl where the following code ends
up with the array @args, which is supposed to end up with the ./configure
command line, does not have any of the parameters put in:

# Build our argument list to call the real configure script later.
our @args = (q{./configure});
our %args;
foreach (@ARGV) {
  if (/^--([^=]+?)=["']?(.*?)["']?$/) {
    $args{$1} = $2;
  }
  elsif (/^([^=]+?)=["']?(.*?)["']?$/) {
    $ENV{$1} = $2;
  }
}

I'm not sure what was intended to be done with %args and @args, but it isn't
there. I don't have time to write up a patch right now, so I'm posting this bug
and I'll get a patch later if nobody grabs this first.

This looks like a 3.0 blocker, right?
Comment 1 Malte S. Stretz 2004-07-06 00:12:49 UTC 
Created attachment 2084 [details]
patch against configure.pl and Makefile.PL

Weird that this went on unnoticed that long. I remember the reason why the
switches were not passed directly to configure:
* Unknown ones generated either warnings or even errors in previous versions of
autoconf.
* --sysconfdir has different semantics.

But I'm sure that there was code to make it work anyway.... Weird, but here's
the patch which works fine. It also passes the correct sysconfdir, just in case
we ever want to store some data there.
Comment 2 Sidney Markowitz 2004-07-06 02:12:08 UTC 
+1

I built and tested with ENABLE_SSL=yes under Cygwin
Comment 3 Theo Van Dinter 2004-07-06 08:02:00 UTC 
+1

tests fine for me :)
Comment 4 Malte S. Stretz 2004-07-06 08:32:40 UTC 
committed, r22631