[erlang-questions] rebar question

[Serge Aleynikov]

In order to compile a port program using rebar, I need to place the
resulting port program in the architecture-specific folder:
    priv/$ARCH/exec-port

where $ARCH is the result of the call:
    erlang:system_info(system_architecture)

I was thinking of setting ARCH in the pre-compile hook.  However, it
doesn't seem that the "port_specs" config clause allows expansion of
environment variables, so if the "ARCH" variable has a value, the
following won't work:

{port_specs, [{"priv/$ARCH/exec-port", ["c_src/*.cpp"]}]}.

Is there a work-around I could use to accomplish this?

On 9/29/2012 5:23 AM, Tim Watson wrote:
> I'm a heavy rebar user and have compiled ports with it before, so give me a shout if you need any assistance. I can also do testing on several unix platforms. 
> 
> On 28 Sep 2012, at 22:41, Serge Aleynikov <serge@REDACTED> wrote:
> 
>> Unfortunately I don't have OSx to test this.  I can't reproduce your
>> problem on Linux.  Perhaps you could check the libtool version this way:
>>
>> $ grep "^macro_version" /usr/bin/libtool
>> macro_version=2.4
>>
>> and if yours is different, try to upgrade it.
>>
>> In order to simplify the build process I'll try to convert erlexec to
>> use rebar some time next week, which will eliminate autotools-based
>> toolchain.  Need to figure out with rebar how to test and optionally
>> enable conditional defines based on presence of special C headers such
>> as "sys/capability.h" when compiling a port program.
>>
>> On 9/28/2012 5:16 PM, Tim Watson wrote:> Well I do, but clearly not the
>> same version as you?
>>>
>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ which libtool
>>> /usr/bin/libtool
>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ ls -la /usr/bin/ | grep libtool
>>> -r-xr-xr-x     1 root   wheel    149216 22 May 15:30 libtool
>>> lrwxr-xr-x     1 root   wheel         7 22 May 15:30 ranlib -> libtool
>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ libtool --version
>>> libtool: unknown option character `-' in: --version
>>> Usage: libtool -static [-] file [...] [-filelist listfile[,dirname]]
>> [-arch_only arch] [-sacLT]
>>> Usage: libtool -dynamic [-] file [...] [-filelist listfile[,dirname]]
>> [-arch_only arch] [-o output] [-install_name name]
>> [-compatibility_version #] [-current_version #] [-seg1addr 0x#]
>> [-segs_read_only_addr 0x#] [-segs_read_write_addr 0x#] [-seg_addr_table
>> <filename>] [-seg_addr_table_filename <file_system_path>] [-all_load]
>> [-noall_load]
>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $
>>>
>>> Honestly the osx build tool chain drives me nuts sometimes. :/
>>>
>>> On 28 Sep 2012, at 17:24, Serge Aleynikov wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it possible that you don't have libtool installed (missing
>>>> AC_PROG_LIBTOOL)?
>>>>
>>>> I have the following on linux and everything builds fine:
>>>> $ autoconf -V
>>>> autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.68
>>>> $ libtool --version
>>>> libtool (GNU libtool) 2.4
>>>> $ ./build
>>>> $ make
>>>> $ make install
>>>> $ tree install
>>>> install
>>>> └── exec-1.0
>>>>   ├── ebin
>>>>   │   ├── exec.app
>>>>   │   ├── exec_app.beam
>>>>   │   └── exec.beam
>>>>   ├── include
>>>>   │   └── exec.hrl
>>>>   ├── priv
>>>>   │   └── x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
>>>>   │       └── bin
>>>>   │           └── exec-port
>>>>   └── src
>>>>       ├── exec_app.erl
>>>>       └── exec.erl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/2012 7:45 AM, Tim Watson wrote:> The project doesn't appear to
>>>> build cleanly on mac os lion:
>>>>>
>>>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ ./configure
>>>>> configure: error: cannot find install-sh, install.sh, or shtool in
>>>> config "."/config
>>>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ ./build
>>>>> Install dir: /usr/local/src/erlang/erlexec/install
>>>>> aclocal
>>>>> autoconf -i
>>>>> configure.ac:19: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL
>>>>>    If this token and others are legitimate, please use
>> m4_pattern_allow.
>>>>>    See the Autoconf documentation.
>>>>> make: *** [configure] Error 1
>>>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $
>>>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $ autoconf -V
>>>>> autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69
>>>>> Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>>>> License GPLv3+/Autoconf: GNU GPL version 3 or later
>>>>> <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>,
>>>> <http://gnu.org/licenses/exceptions.html>
>>>>> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
>>>>> There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
>>>>>
>>>>> Written by David J. MacKenzie and Akim Demaille.
>>>>> t4@REDACTED:erlexec $
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a specific version of autotools required to build and compile
>>>> erlexec?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Sep 2012, at 20:11, Tim Watson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 27 Sep 2012, at 19:18, freza@REDACTED wrote:
>>>>>>> Haven't been following this thread closely, but it seems erlexec
>> wasn't
>>>>>>> mentioned yet:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    http://code.google.com/p/erlexec/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't appear very well maintained. I might pick it apart and
>>>> rewrite it when native processes get released - it is a cool idea.
>>>> Anyway, for the time being it's not a great help as I'm writing a
>>>> framework to help set up and tear down clusters for distributed testing
>>>> (based largely on common test) so I want to minimise the number of
>>>> dependencies as much as possible. Besides, I'm more interested in
>>>> working on the remote/ssh runner+monitor next, rather than spending
>>>> another age fiddling around with the script runner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But yes, erlexec does look interesting and has been on my radar since
>>>> it popped up on this list a few months back, discussing the desire to do
>>>> proper signal handling (such as sending SIGTERM, SIGHUP, etc to the
>>>> external program) without resorting to os:cmd("kill -" ++ Code ++ " " ++
>>>> OsPid). Again, this is something that linked-in drivers *can* deal with
>>>> to a limited extent, and therefore I suspect that native processes will
>>>> make for a very nice foundation on which to build an alternative to
>>>> open_port/2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, IIRC there was a cool command line testing framework open
>>>> sourced in the last year which was announced on this list. I can't
>>>> remember what it was called, but it has a port driver that handles the
>>>> the external comms and so on - looked very nice, although that's not
>>>> what I'm trying to do/be as my focus is on getting things in a
>>>> consistent state and monitoring to make sure they stay that way through
>>>> the test run, then tearing down nicely before the next phase kicks off.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>>
>>>