crossbinutils @ 1.0 0-byte manpages

[japanesecake (mmallet)]

I am about to submit my first ports but I've noticed that for one of them, a cross build of binutils, the manpages are 0-bytes files (few bytes when their got gzipped).

ll /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-*
-r--r--r--+ 1 root  admin    40B Nov 19  2013 /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-addr2line.1.gz
-r--r--r--+ 1 root  admin    33B Nov 19  2013 /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-ar.1.gz
-r--r--r--+ 1 root  admin    33B Nov 19  2013 /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-as.1.gz
-r--r--r--+ 1 root  admin    38B Nov 19  2013 /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-c++filt.1.gz
...

In the port's build directory, when I look at the manpages file size, I get the following (sh-elf-binutils is the port I am working on, ):

/opt/local/var/macports/build/_devel_ports_cross_sh-elf-binutils/sh-elf-binutils/work$ find . -iname "*.1" | xargs ls -ali
15648159 -rw-r--r--+ 1 macports  wheel   10470 Mar 25  2013 ./binutils-2.23.2/binutils/doc/addr2line.1
15648160 -rw-r--r--+ 1 macports  wheel   18478 Mar 25  2013 ./binutils-2.23.2/binutils/doc/ar.1
...
15667876 -rw-r--r--+ 1 macports  wheel       0 Oct  6 19:44 ./build/binutils/doc/addr2line.1
15667877 -rw-r--r--+ 1 macports  wheel       0 Oct  6 19:44 ./build/binutils/doc/ar.1
...

It seems that there is something wrong when copying the manpages. Can someone point me out the thing that I may had not done correctly? (before I submit a fix I would rather be sure I just do not miss an option)

By building binutils manually, I get manpages installed correctly though.

How to reproduce:

sudo port install arm-elf-binutils
man arm-elf-ar
fgets: No such file or directory
Error reading man page /opt/local/share/man/man1/arm-elf-ar.1.gz
No manual entry for arm-elf-ar

[ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)]

Could you attach the main.log file? It's normally deleted after a build, so please rebuild with the -k flag to keep it:

sudo port -f uninstall arm-elf-binutils
sudo port clean arm-elf-binutils
sudo port -ks install arm-elf-binutils

Then attach the file at:

port logfile arm-elf-binutils

[japanesecake (mmallet)]

Cc Me!

[japanesecake (mmallet)]

I use this as a fix but maybe there is a better way around:

post-destroot {
  # Fix manpages
  set binutilsman ${worksrcpath}/binutils/doc
  set mandir ${prefix}/share/man/man1
  foreach manpage [glob -tails -directory ${binutilsman} *.1] {
    system "cp ${binutilsman}/${manpage} ${binutilsman}/${crossbinutils.target}-${manpage}"
    xinstall -m 644 ${binutilsman}/${crossbinutils.target}-${manpage} \
             ${destroot}${mandir}
  }
}

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Cc Me!

[japanesecake (mmallet)]

Well, I found out what is wrong. In the "crossbinutils-1.0.tcl" script, the post-extract phase deletes the "etc" directory which contains the tex2pod script:

post-extract {
        delete ${worksrcpath}/etc
        file mkdir ${workpath}/build
    }

If I comment out the "delete ${worksrcpath}/etc" line I get my man pages generated. Does anyone know why we remove this etc directory?

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Replying to matthieu.mallet@…:

Well, I found out what is wrong. In the "crossbinutils-1.0.tcl" script, the post-extract phase deletes the "etc" directory which contains the tex2pod script:

post-extract {
        delete ${worksrcpath}/etc
        file mkdir ${workpath}/build
    }

If I comment out the "delete ${worksrcpath}/etc" line I get my man pages generated. Does anyone know why we remove this etc directory?

I am guessing it was because the stuff in it is included in a bunch of other GNU packages as well, so leaving them there could lead to conflicts... I suppose if conflicts are the issue, though, it would make more sense to wait until the destroot phase to remove them, and to only get rid of the specific things that conflict instead of the entire directory...

[chrstphrchvz (Christopher Chavez)]

The binutils port, which doesn’t use the crossbinutils portgroup, also has this issue since it deletes ${worksrcpath}/etc. However I would think every port that does use the crossbinutils portgroup is also affected.