Re: Problem building latest git source

[Deri]

On Thursday, 7 July 2022 05:48:33 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:

> Hi Robert,

>

> At 2022-07-06T17:34:49-0400, Robert Goulding wrote:

> > I checked out the latest source and tried building it on my Chromebook

> > (i.e., Debian 11 (bullseye)). The compile stopped when it tried to

> > build the pdf of all the man pages:

> >

> > make[1]: Entering directory '/home/rdgoulding/groff-git'

> > GROFF    doc/groff-man-pages.pdf

> > gropdf:src/utils/addftinfo/addftinfo.1: fatal error: failed to open

> > '/usr/share/ghostscript/9.27/Resource/Font/NimbusRoman-Italic'

> > make[1]: *** [Makefile:12695: doc/groff-man-pages.pdf] Error 1

> > make[1]: *** Deleting file 'doc/groff-man-pages.pdf'

> > make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/rdgoulding/groff-git'

> > make: *** [Makefile:5701: all] Error 2

> >

> > The odd thing is that I have ghostscript version 9.53.3 installed, not

> > 9.27, and the font it can't find is at

> > /usr/share/ghostscript/9.53.3/Resource/Font/NimbusRoman-Italic

>

> I hadn't built in my bullseye chroot lately because I stopped fiddling

> with the build system for a while (apart from adding regression tests),

> but I too have a problem, though it differs from yours.

>

> In my chroot, the BuildFoundries script is not locating the 'afmtodit'

> command (which is one of the build artifacts).  This happens with both

> in-tree and out-of-tree builds.  My bullseye chroot also uses

> Ghostscript 9.53.3, and these fonts _are_ found.  Please find part of my

> 'configure' output below.

>

> Nothing in the build hard-codes the Ghostscript version number used in

> the font search path, so I am wondering if you haven't forgotten to

> re-run 'configure'.  It might help to 'make distclean' first...but I

> wouldn't be surprised if you hit the same afmtodit problem I did.  I'll

> look at BuildFoundries and see if I can spot an error, but Deri's eyes

> will be better than mine here.

>

> In the below, you might want to see how your 'configure' output compares

> to mine for the "gs version" and "URW fonts" checks.

>

> Deri, can you throw any light on this stuff?

One possibility is that somehow it is running the currently installed groff, rather than test-groff, so it would be looking at the download file in /usr/share/groff/1.23.0/font/devpdf rather than the new download just created within the build directory. Please could you have a look in font/devpdf in the build directory to see if the font paths refer to the correct ghostscript version. The download file under the /usr/share/groff directory is likely to contain stale paths to a previous version of ghostscript.

Cheers

Deri

> Regards,

> Branden