[PATCH] waf: Fix the build on openbsd

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 07:03:45AM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:12:55AM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 05:26:32PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 05:12:16PM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 02:59:29PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 02:43:31PM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 02:09:17PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 12:41:56PM +0100, Ralph Böhme wrote:
> > > > > > we lose all Samba-specific changes. Changes that are generic enough
> > > > > > to go into wafadmin/ should really go upstream, so we can pull them down
> > > > > > from there.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My understanding is that going through upstream is not an option for us
> > > > > because we're far too backlevel, and as Ralph has pointed out upstream
> > > > > is not very open to changes from us.
> > > > 
> > > > Upstream has accepted patches from us, and helped fix issues we run into. I'm
> > > > happy to help if there are any specific patches you have trouble getting
> > > > upstreamed.
> > > 
> > > My particular problem was introduced by a patch with the
> > > commit message:
> > > 
> > > commit 115eb94215f4d9c73d05606de2ad978f6b48d07f
> > > Author:     Thomas Nagy <tnagy2pow10 at gmail.com>
> > > AuthorDate: Tue Sep 17 00:00:40 2013 +0200
> > > Commit:     Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>
> > > CommitDate: Fri Jan 9 02:02:07 2015 +0100
> > > 
> > >     wafadmin: backported the openbsd fixes from waf 1.7
> > >     
> > >     This is a backport from waf 1.5...
> > >     
> > >     Reviewed-by: Michael Adam <obnox at samba.org>
> > >     Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org>
> > >     
> > >     Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>
> > >     Autobuild-Date(master): Fri Jan  9 02:02:07 CET 2015 on sn-devel-104
> > > 
> > > I don't think it is even worth trying to get this fixed upstream, this
> > > came from upstream!
> > Does that mean this is a regression introduced by upstream (based on a patch we
> > submitted upstream)?
> 
> I haven't traced the history of this patch, but git blame
> points at this commit, and if I revert it, my problem is
> gone.

See this discussion, which seems to have been the reason these changes were introduced
upstream in the first place: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2014-January/097338.html

Jelmer