Re: GCC 8/9 ABI change: call for rebuilds

2018-07-19 Thread Wolfgang Stoeggl 
In the meantime, gcc-8.1.1-5 is available as an update for F28.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/KWRHNP54HKNMN3DG5XI5URE6REYTYPGW/

Re: GCC 8/9 ABI change: call for rebuilds

2018-07-13 Thread Sergio Durigan Junior 
On Tuesday, July 10 2018, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 15:31 -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> Recently a serious bug in the compiler was discovered whereby we miscompiled
>> several packages. The problem only occurs in C++ programs that contain a 
>> class
>> with a trivial move constructor and deleted copy constructor.  For such
>> programs, the calling convention changed inappropriately, in the sense that 
>> an
>> object was passed via memory rather than via registers.  See
>> .
>> 
>> I did a scratch mass rebuild with a specially-tweaked gcc in order to find 
>> out
>> which packages need to be rebuilt.  Since the problem occurred in both GCC 8
>> and GCC 9, we will need to rebuild packages in F28 and F29:
>> 
>> ceph-12.2.4-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> chromium-67.0.3396.79-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> firefox-60.0.1-6.fc29.src.rpm
>> gdb-8.1.50.20180605-18.fc29.src.rpm
>> insight-8.1.50.20180216-2.fc29.src.rpm
>> mame-0.198-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> v8-6.7.17-4.fc29.src.rpm
>> polymake-3.2r3-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> pybind11-2.2.2-3.fc29.src.rpm
>> qt5-qtwebengine-5.10.1-7.fc29.src.rpm
>> cpprest-2.10.2-2.fc28.src.rpm
>> waylandpp-0.2.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> webkit2gtk3-2.21.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
>> webrtc-audio-processing-0.3-7.fc29.src.rpm
>> 
>> The problem is fixed in gcc-8.1.1-2.fc28 and gcc-8.1.1-2.fc29.  But it seems
>> the F28 buildroots still have the unpatched version:
>> 
>> $ koji latest-pkg f28-build gcc
>> Build Tag   Built by
>>     
>> 
>> gcc-8.1.1-1.fc28  f28-updates   jakub
>> 
>> So perhaps the rebuild in F28 needs to wait a bit.
>
> No update has been submitted for gcc-8.1.1-2.fc28. A buildroot override
> was submitted for gcc-8.1.1-4.fc28, but it expired already:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/gcc-8.1.1-4.fc28
>
> the only ways for a package to get into the buildroot are to be in a
> stable update or to have an active buildroot override. So either an
> update for GCC needs to be sent out and pushed stable before the
> rebuilds are done, or the buildroot override must be renewed and
> extended (this could be done, for instance, if we wanted to submit an
> update of GCC and the rebuilt packages together, after doing the
> rebuilds).

Any news here?  I'm still waiting for the new GCC package to hit the F28
buildroot so I can issue a rebuild for GDB.

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X4RG7WC2AWG2DH5YHZ6WZ5CSZBYC7TTH/

Re: GCC 8/9 ABI change: call for rebuilds

2018-07-10 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 15:31 -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Recently a serious bug in the compiler was discovered whereby we miscompiled
> several packages. The problem only occurs in C++ programs that contain a class
> with a trivial move constructor and deleted copy constructor.  For such
> programs, the calling convention changed inappropriately, in the sense that an
> object was passed via memory rather than via registers.  See
> .
> 
> I did a scratch mass rebuild with a specially-tweaked gcc in order to find out
> which packages need to be rebuilt.  Since the problem occurred in both GCC 8
> and GCC 9, we will need to rebuild packages in F28 and F29:
> 
> ceph-12.2.4-1.fc29.src.rpm
> chromium-67.0.3396.79-1.fc29.src.rpm
> firefox-60.0.1-6.fc29.src.rpm
> gdb-8.1.50.20180605-18.fc29.src.rpm
> insight-8.1.50.20180216-2.fc29.src.rpm
> mame-0.198-1.fc29.src.rpm
> v8-6.7.17-4.fc29.src.rpm
> polymake-3.2r3-1.fc29.src.rpm
> pybind11-2.2.2-3.fc29.src.rpm
> qt5-qtwebengine-5.10.1-7.fc29.src.rpm
> cpprest-2.10.2-2.fc28.src.rpm
> waylandpp-0.2.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
> webkit2gtk3-2.21.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
> webrtc-audio-processing-0.3-7.fc29.src.rpm
> 
> The problem is fixed in gcc-8.1.1-2.fc28 and gcc-8.1.1-2.fc29.  But it seems
> the F28 buildroots still have the unpatched version:
> 
> $ koji latest-pkg f28-build gcc
> Build Tag   Built by
>     
> 
> gcc-8.1.1-1.fc28  f28-updates   jakub
> 
> So perhaps the rebuild in F28 needs to wait a bit.

No update has been submitted for gcc-8.1.1-2.fc28. A buildroot override
was submitted for gcc-8.1.1-4.fc28, but it expired already:

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/gcc-8.1.1-4.fc28

the only ways for a package to get into the buildroot are to be in a
stable update or to have an active buildroot override. So either an
update for GCC needs to be sent out and pushed stable before the
rebuilds are done, or the buildroot override must be renewed and
extended (this could be done, for instance, if we wanted to submit an
update of GCC and the rebuilt packages together, after doing the
rebuilds).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/J3AO2RTJH7IJQW3QJS3CTHUXBCGVDW4W/

GCC 8/9 ABI change: call for rebuilds

2018-07-10 Thread Marek Polacek 
Recently a serious bug in the compiler was discovered whereby we miscompiled
several packages. The problem only occurs in C++ programs that contain a class
with a trivial move constructor and deleted copy constructor.  For such
programs, the calling convention changed inappropriately, in the sense that an
object was passed via memory rather than via registers.  See
.

I did a scratch mass rebuild with a specially-tweaked gcc in order to find out
which packages need to be rebuilt.  Since the problem occurred in both GCC 8
and GCC 9, we will need to rebuild packages in F28 and F29:

ceph-12.2.4-1.fc29.src.rpm
chromium-67.0.3396.79-1.fc29.src.rpm
firefox-60.0.1-6.fc29.src.rpm
gdb-8.1.50.20180605-18.fc29.src.rpm
insight-8.1.50.20180216-2.fc29.src.rpm
mame-0.198-1.fc29.src.rpm
v8-6.7.17-4.fc29.src.rpm
polymake-3.2r3-1.fc29.src.rpm
pybind11-2.2.2-3.fc29.src.rpm
qt5-qtwebengine-5.10.1-7.fc29.src.rpm
cpprest-2.10.2-2.fc28.src.rpm
waylandpp-0.2.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
webkit2gtk3-2.21.3-1.fc29.src.rpm
webrtc-audio-processing-0.3-7.fc29.src.rpm

The problem is fixed in gcc-8.1.1-2.fc28 and gcc-8.1.1-2.fc29.  But it seems
the F28 buildroots still have the unpatched version:

$ koji latest-pkg f28-build gcc
Build Tag   Built by
    
gcc-8.1.1-1.fc28  f28-updates   jakub

So perhaps the rebuild in F28 needs to wait a bit.

Marek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/KECGQVOYOURLKFP4ZEM63JZDK32GADI4/