Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Hi, On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 21:17:41 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Hilmar_Preu=c3=9fe?= wrote: > We stopped provide a symbols files, instead we use shlibs now. Does that > eventually solve your issue? Remove the tag patch for now. Yes, I just synced 2.5.10+ds1-3 into Ubuntu, and I can confirm that it builds successfully on ppc64el. Thanks, Logan
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Control: tags -1 - patch signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
tags -1 - patch Am 12.11.2018 um 03:12 teilte Jeremy Bicha mit: Hi Jeremy, > teckit fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el because the symbols don't > match. A few symbols are added and several are missing. > > Notably, Ubuntu's ppc64el uses -O3 by default which occasionally leads > to symbols differences compared to all other release architectures > which default to -O2. > We stopped provide a symbols files, instead we use shlibs now. Does that eventually solve your issue? Remove the tag patch for now. H. -- sigfault #206401 http://counter.li.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Hi Hilmar, > https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu2.patch My latest upload has fixed the build onppc64el, but it still fails on armel armhf s390x. Guess that is shlib files and drop all symbols. It is anyway only texlive using it at the moment. Norbert -- PREINING Norbert https://www.preining.info Accelia Inc. + IFMGA ProGuide + TU Wien + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Dev GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Hi Hilmar, > lots about symbol files I tend to drop the symbols file completely, it seems - adn this is confirmed by others, that symbols files for c++ programs/libs are just broken. https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2020/07/msg00259.html and use shlibs files instead. > I changed the symbols file according to [1]. Now the build is fine on > i386, but fails on amd64. It was not that easy, sorry! One needs to go through each single, convert the symbols with c++filt, and replace with the actual names, otherwise within no time the generated symbols will be borken again. Happy g++/c++ world. Best Norbert -- PREINING Norbert https://www.preining.info Accelia Inc. + IFMGA ProGuide + TU Wien + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Dev GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Am 21.11.2018 um 10:49 teilte Matthias Klose mit: Hi, > Control: tags -1 + patch > > proposed patch at > https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu1.patch > New URL: https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu2.patch H. -- sigfault #206401 http://counter.li.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Control: tags -1 + patch proposed patch at https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu1.patch
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Hi guys, I don't have the mental bandwidth to deal with this. Please feel free to NMU with something that makes sense. Regards, Daniel On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:18 PM Matthias Klose wrote: > the main question is: are these symbols part of the ABI? And I very much > doubt > that they are. symbols files for C++ are so yesterday. There are better > tools > like abi-compliance-checker and abigail. >
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
the main question is: are these symbols part of the ABI? And I very much doubt that they are. symbols files for C++ are so yesterday. There are better tools like abi-compliance-checker and abigail.
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Patches accepted provided it doesn't break the Debian builds and doesn't require manual maintenance as upstream will be releasing a new version by the end of the year and the symbols file will help see if there are any API or ABI changes. Regards, Daniel On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 7:28 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:45 AM Daniel Glassey wrote: > > Are you aware of any ways for the symbols file to handle different > symbols on different distros? Do you know what any other packages with a > symbols file do with this problem? > > I think you could just mark all the symbols that don't appear > everywhere as optional. > > I didn't try, but maybe those symbols changes happen anywhere that -O3 is > used. > > Thanks, > Jeremy Bicha >
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:45 AM Daniel Glassey wrote: > Are you aware of any ways for the symbols file to handle different symbols on > different distros? Do you know what any other packages with a symbols file do > with this problem? I think you could just mark all the symbols that don't appear everywhere as optional. I didn't try, but maybe those symbols changes happen anywhere that -O3 is used. Thanks, Jeremy Bicha
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Hi, Are you aware of any ways for the symbols file to handle different symbols on different distros? Do you know what any other packages with a symbols file do with this problem? Or should there be a patch for Ubuntu rather than a change to the Debian package if the ppc64el build there is going to be compiled differently than the Debian one? Thanks, Daniel On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 9:15 AM Jeremy Bicha wrote: > Source: teckit > Version: 2.5.8+ds2-5 > Severity: important > > teckit fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el because the symbols don't > match. A few symbols are added and several are missing. > > Notably, Ubuntu's ppc64el uses -O3 by default which occasionally leads > to symbols differences compared to all other release architectures > which default to -O2. > > Build log: > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/teckit/2.5.8+ds2-5/+build/15640076 > > Thanks, > Jeremy Bicha >
Bug#913542: teckit: Fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el (symbols)
Source: teckit Version: 2.5.8+ds2-5 Severity: important teckit fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el because the symbols don't match. A few symbols are added and several are missing. Notably, Ubuntu's ppc64el uses -O3 by default which occasionally leads to symbols differences compared to all other release architectures which default to -O2. Build log: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/teckit/2.5.8+ds2-5/+build/15640076 Thanks, Jeremy Bicha
