| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tyler_Durden
Apprentice
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 189
Location: Germany
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 8:27 pm Post subject: glibc 2.23 and undefined reference to `minor' or `major' |
 |
|
i had problems emerging gnome-base/gvfs:
| Code: | gnome-base/gvfs-1.26.3::gentoo USE="bluray cdda gnome-online-accounts google gphoto2 gtk http ios mtp nfs samba systemd udev udisks zeroconf -afp -archive -fuse -gnome-keyring {-test}"
./.libs/libmetadata.a(metatree.o): In function `meta_lookup_cache_lookup_path':
metatree.c:(.text+0x55f0): undefined reference to `minor'
metatree.c:(.text+0x55fd): undefined reference to `major'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status |
and media-libs/mesa:
| Code: | media-libs/mesa-11.1.2-r1::gentoo USE="classic dri3 egl gallium gbm gles2 llvm nptl opencl udev vdpau wayland xvmc -bindist -d3d9 -debug -gles1 -openmax -osmesa -pax_kernel -pic (-selinux) -vaapi -xa" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)" VIDEO_CARDS="(-freedreno) -i915 -i965 -ilo -intel -nouveau -r100 -r200 -r300 -r600 -radeon -radeonsi -vmware"
/var/tmp/portage/media-libs/mesa-11.1.2-r1/work/mesa-11.1.2/src/gbm/main/gbm.c: In function ‘_gbm_mesa_get_device’:
/var/tmp/portage/media-libs/mesa-11.1.2-r1/work/mesa-11.1.2/src/gbm/main/gbm.c:120:11: error: implicit declaration of function ‘major’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
if (major(dev) == major(buf.st_rdev) &&
^
/var/tmp/portage/media-libs/mesa-11.1.2-r1/work/mesa-11.1.2/src/gbm/main/gbm.c:121:11: error: implicit declaration of function ‘minor’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
minor(dev) == minor(buf.st_rdev)) {
^
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
Makefile:857: recipe for target 'main/gbm.lo' failed |
After some searching i found that must have something to do with "/usr/include/sys/sysmacros.h" which belongs to sys-libs/glibc. So i downgraded the recently merged v2.23 to 2.22 and these problems were gone 
Other packages might be affected.
_________________
Gentoo 17.1 x86_64
Intel Core i9-9900K
Asus MAXIMUS XI HERO
AMD Radeon 6800XT
64GB DDR4
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 1TB
8x Seagate Archive (SATA-RAID 64TB)
Digital Devices Cine S2 V6.5 DVB Adapter |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
zwede
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 103
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you SO MUCH for this post!!!!
I had glibc in my package.keywords for some historic reason and got 2.23. Then I started getting these faults halfway through a plasma update and was stuck with no desktop. Couldn't go back to plasma-5.5.4 either as packages that had built previously now didn't build.
Downgrading glibc let me finish the plasma upgrade and my desktop is back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miyuki
n00b
Joined: 24 Mar 2016
Posts: 1
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:06 am Post subject: patch causes exclude sys/sysmacros.h |
|
|
I found the patch "00_all_0009-sys-types.h-drop-sys-sysmacros.h-include.patch" in sys-libs/glibc causes this issue.
This patch drops "#include <sys/sysmacros.h>" from /usr/include/sys/types.h
But of course, this patch was added for some reasons
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-11/msg00253.html
This issue should be solved. I recommends not to install glibc-2.23 before it is keyworded(supported). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ThGravo
n00b
Joined: 20 Apr 2006
Posts: 24
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| xorg-server 1.18.3 too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 8:14 am Post subject: Re: patch causes exclude sys/sysmacros.h |
|
|
| miyuki wrote: | I found the patch "00_all_0009-sys-types.h-drop-sys-sysmacros.h-include.patch" in sys-libs/glibc causes this issue.
This patch drops "#include <sys/sysmacros.h>" from /usr/include/sys/types.h
But of course, this patch was added for some reasons
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-11/msg00253.html
This issue should be solved. I recommends not to install glibc-2.23 before it is keyworded(supported). |
Hmm the guy who originally proposed dropping the include, and doing distro builds to test breakage, ended up concluding it was not a good idea.
Curious that it should have been applied.
wrt other software, if this isn't reverted upstream, it will have to be patched to #include <sys/sysmacros.h>, a non-standard header.
If upstream want to continue with the patch, IMO it should be locally reverted by Gentoo for that process to complete. (or ~arch users are going to end up in troubles, and likely hard-mask it.)
edit: not <sys/types.h>
Last edited by steveL on Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xywa
Veteran
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Posts: 1631
Location: /mnt/Gentoo/Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | xorg-server 1.18.3 too. |
That day I could not compile ANY of xorg-server back 1.16.xxx. Downgrading glibc solved my problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My mistake; from reading the bug, it appears an inclusion of <sys/sysmacros.h> would be required
Glibc should just stay as-is, imo; ie: Gentoo should revert the patch.
Not going to happen, but there we go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:43 am Post subject: Re: patch causes exclude sys/sysmacros.h |
|
|
We're considered lab rats by this idiot, so no surprise it came without a news item or anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Buffoon
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jun 2015
Posts: 1369
Location: EU or US
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I have mongodb build failure.Glad I found this thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Perfect Gentleman
Veteran
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 1248
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
unpatch the ducking patch
| Code: | From 1053a4902ebff0ba30098fdcad614d963de87c3d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:54:31 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] sys/types.h: drop sys/sysmacros.h include
We want to break apart this include path due to namespace pollution.
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-11/msg00253.html
---
posix/sys/types.h | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/posix/sys/types.h b/posix/sys/types.h
index a728567..b3007db 100644
--- a/posix/sys/types.h
+++ b/posix/sys/types.h
@@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ typedef int register_t __attribute__ ((__mode__ (__word__)));
/* It also defines `fd_set' and the FD_* macros for `select'. */
# include <sys/select.h>
+
+/* BSD defines these symbols, so we follow. */
+# include <sys/sysmacros.h>
#endif /* Use misc. */
--
2.6.2
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geki
Advocate
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2387
Location: Germania
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
phew, was about to post in tracker bug,especially because someone posted not to post there. 
we have some brave hearts in the gentoo developers community.
xf86-video-intel and wine failed so far. fun.
_________________
hear hear |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hydrapolic
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Posts: 126
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ottre
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geki wrote: | | we have some brave hearts in the gentoo developers community. |
vapier does things for a good reason.
Like the dumb-echo patch for app-shells/dash, to make it a truly POSIX-compliant shell, that caused a lot of build failures.
Pretty much all of them got fixed upstream; they were happy for the increased portability of their shell scripts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ottre wrote: | | vapier does things for a good reason. |
He may have reasons, but his methods suck, big-time.
In this instance he should have hard-masked the version with his unilateral patch, for testing. (This is hardly unfamiliar to him.)
Then he could very easily have smoke-tested the change on a distro-wide level, by the use of a tinderbox (hardly rocket-science, given that users have been doing that for about a decade, to my knowledge), and patched the relevant software (thus making it work on both types of setup on a Linux install.)
If he felt unable to submit a patch, he could just have submitted bugs, pointing out that major/makedev aren't standardised.
Only he prefers to do this via a very convoluted process that wastes everyone's time, most especially that of users.
Because he's worth it^W^W^W he can.
Or perhaps because he's chasing brownie-points with the wrong people (anyone other than Gentoo users.)
AFAIC, it's totally lame. When glibc developers look after you better than "core" distro developers, something's really borked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Code: | The minor/major/makedev macros are not entirely standard. glibc has had
the definitions in sys/sysmacros.h since the start, and wants to move away
from always defining them implicitly via sys/types.h (as this pollutes the
namespace in violation of POSIX). Other C libraries have already dropped
them. Since the configure script already checks for this header, use that
to pull in the header in files that use these macros. |
Oh puhleez, "violation of POSIX" what rot. Namespace violations only occur if you don't test __USE_BSD (or w/e they're calling it this year) which is set under _GNU_SOURCE or _BSD_SOURCE.
"glibc following the fashion of other libc's" has got to be the funniest part, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlashBeast
Retired Dev
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 2922
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 2:33 pm Post subject: Re: patch causes exclude sys/sysmacros.h |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: |
We're considered lab rats by this idiot, so no surprise it came without a news item or anything. |
Classic Vapier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Perfect Gentleman
Veteran
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 1248
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | sys-libs/glibc-2.23-r2: Skipping 00_all_0009-sys-types.h-drop-sys-sysmacros.h-include.patch due to EPATCH_EXCLUDE |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlashBeast
Retired Dev
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 2922
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And to balance out my complaining a bit: there's a dev that's earned my respect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GuntherDW
n00b
Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 38
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With regards to breakage of the patch, for completionist sake, sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.145-r2 also breaks with the patch applied.
It was a pain trying to find out what exactly caused it to break because I couldn't find something on google.
Only when a mesa recompile broke could I find this thread...
But in all honesty, just using us a mere "testbed" is kind of the wrong attitude I'd expect from a Gentoo developer.
Even if we're running ~arch just blindly applying a patch and letting us report the bugs for you instead of doing research on your own is kind of abhorrent.
I'd expect stuff like this from an experimental overlay, not the main portage tree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ottre
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | He may have reasons, but his methods suck, big-time. |
Yeah, this mess could have been avoided with a news item.
"...Either stay on glibc 2.22 or set the EPATCH_EXCLUDE variable in your glibc bashrc file like so..."
I don't like masking except under extreme circumstances, like an x86 binary package masked on arm, it's a form of procrastination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ottre
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GuntherDW wrote: | | I'd expect stuff like this from an experimental overlay, not the main portage tree. |
I think it's a major selling point of Gentoo that we have developers who care about POSIX. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GuntherDW
n00b
Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 38
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's true that caring about POSIX can be a good thing, but his methodology behind just dropping the patch was wrong.
Besides, there's loads of things in the Linux sphere that aren't really POSIX minded.
Most notably things like systemd, but I'd rather not open that can of worms here  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ottre wrote: | | GuntherDW wrote: | | I'd expect stuff like this from an experimental overlay, not the main portage tree. |
I think it's a major selling point of Gentoo that we have developers who care about POSIX. |
There's "caring about POSIX" and then there's "standards wankery". This change firmly belongs in the same group as the pointless memcpy change which broke Flash for everyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
