Ticket #9899 (closed defect: fixed)
BUG: srm-1.2.8 runtime error - fails to remove files
| Reported by: | bgmnt@… | Owned by: | macports-tickets@… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ports | Version: | 1.2 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Port: |
Description
I get this error when trying to remove a file:
dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: _fdatasync
Referenced from: /opt/local/bin/srm Expected in: flat namespace
dyld: Symbol not found: _fdatasync
Referenced from: /opt/local/bin/srm Expected in: flat namespace
Trace/BPT trap
I am using srm 1.2.8 on an iBook G4 @ 1.33GHz and 10.4.7. Here are the specifics: Darwin Kernel Version 8.7.0: Fri May 26 15:20:53 PDT 2006; root:xnu-792.6.76.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc. Also Darwinports version 1.211.
Attachments
Change History
comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by markd@…
- Summary changed from srm fails to remove files to BUG: srm-1.2.8 fails to remove files
comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by css@…
I'm not sure if this is implemented on Mac OS X. The closest thing I can find is this gcc patch that avoids using fdatasync() on Mac OS X using some POSIX macros. I believe that fsync(2) is the function to use instead. Maybe notify upstream?
comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by markd@…
- Summary changed from BUG: srm-1.2.8 fails to remove files to BUG: srm-1.2.8 runtime error - fails to remove files
Changed 5 years ago by vogt@…
- Attachment Portfile-srm.diff added
Patch to Portfile that fixes the bug in Ticket 9899
comment:5 Changed 5 years ago by vogt@…
I just attached a patch to the Portfile that fixes the non-functionality of srm-1.2.8. I have tested this patch on OS X 10.5, running the current version of MacPorts.
The patch simply removes some unnecessary CFLAGS from the Portfile build of srm. Since srm compiles and runs fine if you use the soruce tarball directly from srm's homepage (i.e., not through MacPorts) with no extra flags or configuration options, I'm not sure why these CFLAGS were added to the Portfile build in the first place. If they were added for compatibility purposes with an older OS X version (e.g., 10.3?), I would have no way of testing that. Based on the original ticket description, as well as my own experiences, srm-1.2.8 will not work properly on OS X 10.4 or 10.5 without a patch.
As an aside: I read through the MacPorts documentation, and I couldn't tell whether I should open a new ticket to submit this patch, or just reply to this ticket. If anyone would be willing to let me know whether replying to this ticket was the proper course of action, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you very much.