On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 11:07 AM Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrha...@canonical.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 9:39 PM Sebastien Bacher <seb...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > > > Hey Matthias, > > > > Le 28/09/2020 à 18:07, Matthias Klose a écrit : > > > Some build failures on ppc64el and s390x are caused by a buildd issue, > > > and will > > > be retried soonish. Please ignore these where you see a ftbfs just on > > > those > > > architectures, but successes on the other architectures. > > > > There seems to be some flakyness on arm as well, are those going to be > > retried or should that be requested by e.g pinging you? > > > > Some examples > > > > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499016257/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-armhf.colord-gtk_0.2.0-0ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz > > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499209776/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-arm64.gpm_1.20.7-6_BUILDING.txt.gz > > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499174464/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-arm64.remmina_1.4.8+dfsg-1ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz > > Adding the same armhf dependency issue on these: > htop: > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499078378/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-arm64.htop_3.0.2-1_BUILDING.txt.gz > openvpn: > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499161991/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-armhf.openvpn_2.4.9-3ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz > I see that Laney already filed a bug about that with IS. > > Furthermore some armhf issues are due to > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-10/+bug/1890435 > php7.4: > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/499168409/buildlog_ubuntu-groovy-armhf.php7.4_7.4.9-1ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz > > When doing an initial triage of some errors I found three sets of > recurring issues: > 1. rpc includes like "rpc/rpc.h: No such file"
FYI These are broken by libc6-dev dropping rpc.h being taken over by libtirpc-dev Paths changed: Before: # dpkg -S rpc/types.h rpc/rpc.h libc6-dev:amd64: /usr/include/rpc/types.h libc6-dev:amd64: /usr/include/rpc/rpc.h After: # dpkg -S rpc/types.h rpc/rpc.h libtirpc-dev:amd64: /usr/include/tirpc/rpc/types.h libtirpc-dev:amd64: /usr/include/tirpc/rpc/rpc.h Ubuntu/Debian build of glibc for a long time had --enable-obsolete-rpc but that was now removed upstream and this is the fallout. Include paths might need to add -I/usr/include/tirpc to resolve correctly. This already exists in some places: https://sources.debian.org/src/zsh/5.8-5/configure/?hl=11274#L11274 https://sources.debian.org/src/libquota-perl/1.8.1+dfsg-1/Makef Not (yet) a problem in Debian because there we are still on 2.31 # dpkg -S rpc/types.h rpc/rpc.h libc6-dev:amd64: /usr/include/rpc/types.h libc6-dev:amd64: /usr/include/rpc/rpc.h And we are by pushing glibc2.32 late in groovy we are forcing everything that is left to resolve the same now. I'm not sure should glibc provide a compat path - I assume this was made so that every project has to make a concious switch? Note, in most cases this include path should be covered by libtirpc pkg-config. # pkg-config --cflags libtirpc -I/usr/include/tirpc But e.g. in the case of open-vm-tools that seems not to be propagated to all toolchain calls :-/ > 2. better null checking like " -Werror=nonnull" or "directive argument is > null" > 3. linker shows "multiple definitions of" > > #2 likely comes down to fixing code or disabling the warning for now. > But for #1 and #3 I think there is a general change and every affected > package likely will need the similar fix. > So if someone already debugged those it would be great to let the others know. > > > > Cheers, > > Sebastien Bacher > > > > > > > > -- > > ubuntu-devel mailing list > > ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel > > > > -- > Christian Ehrhardt > Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server > Canonical Ltd -- Christian Ehrhardt Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel