Arches, please test and stabilize the following: app-misc/beagle-0.3.9-r4 amd64 ppc x86 app-misc/tomboy-1.4.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/art-sharp-2.24.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/gconf-sharp-2.24.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/gluezilla-2.6-r1 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/gnome-keyring-sharp-1.0.2 amd64 x86 dev-dotnet/gnome-sharp-2.24.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/gnomevfs-sharp-2.24.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/libgdiplus-2.8.1 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/nant-0.90 amd64 ppc x86 dev-dotnet/xsp-2.8.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-lang/mono-basic-2.8 amd64 ppc x86 dev-lang/mono-2.8.2 amd64 ppc x86 dev-util/mono-debugger-2.8.1-r1 amd64 x86 dev-util/mono-tools-2.8 amd64 ppc x86 dev-util/monodevelop-2.4.2 amd64 x86 media-gfx/paint-mono-0.1.63 amd64 x86 media-sound/muine-0.8.11-r2 amd64 ppc x86 net-ftp/bareftp-0.3.7 amd64 x86 net-irc/smuxi-0.8 amd64 x86 virtual/monodoc-2.8 amd64 ppc x86 www-apache/mod_mono-2.8.2 amd64 ppc x86 x11-plugins/tomboy-reminder-0.9.2 amd64 x86 Reproducible: Always
With everything enabled but USE=minimal I get this stuff: * QA Notice: The following files contain writable and executable sections * Files with such sections will not work properly (or at all!) on some * architectures/operating systems. A bug should be filed at * http://bugs.gentoo.org/ to make sure the issue is fixed. * For more information, see http://hardened.gentoo.org/gnu-stack.xml * Please include the following list of files in your report: * Note: Bugs should be filed for the respective maintainers * of the package in question and not hardened@g.o. * !WX --- --- usr/lib/libmono-2.0.a:mdb-debug-info32.o * RWX --- --- usr/lib/libmono-2.0.so.1.0.0 * RWX --- --- usr/lib/libmonosgen-2.0.so.0.0.0 * !WX --- --- usr/lib/libmonosgen-2.0.a:mdb-debug-info32.o * RWX --- --- usr/bin/mono * QA Notice: Files built without respecting LDFLAGS have been detected * Please include the following list of files in your report: * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/mscorlib.dll.so * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/dmcs.exe.so * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/gmcs.exe.so Is this ok?
(In reply to comment #1) > With everything enabled but USE=minimal I get this stuff: > > * QA Notice: The following files contain writable and executable sections > * Files with such sections will not work properly (or at all!) on some > * architectures/operating systems. A bug should be filed at > * http://bugs.gentoo.org/ to make sure the issue is fixed. > * For more information, see http://hardened.gentoo.org/gnu-stack.xml > * Please include the following list of files in your report: > * Note: Bugs should be filed for the respective maintainers > * of the package in question and not hardened@g.o. > * !WX --- --- usr/lib/libmono-2.0.a:mdb-debug-info32.o > * RWX --- --- usr/lib/libmono-2.0.so.1.0.0 > * RWX --- --- usr/lib/libmonosgen-2.0.so.0.0.0 > * !WX --- --- usr/lib/libmonosgen-2.0.a:mdb-debug-info32.o > * RWX --- --- usr/bin/mono > > This is expected on x86 (bug #220337) > * QA Notice: Files built without respecting LDFLAGS have been detected > * Please include the following list of files in your report: > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/mscorlib.dll.so > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/dmcs.exe.so > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/gmcs.exe.so And I probably need to look at this :-( (and add -Wl,--hash-style=gnu to my LDFLAGS by default)
As I have found, that files aren't supposed to be supplied and are only generated at build, I am working on a new revision removing them (like fedora is also doing). Now, wait for my Athlon 3200+ to end mono compilation and let me banshee and co are still working ok ;-)
OK, go with mono-2.8.2-r1 instead then. Thanks
(In reply to comment #1) > > * QA Notice: Files built without respecting LDFLAGS have been detected > * Please include the following list of files in your report: > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/mscorlib.dll.so > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/dmcs.exe.so > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/gmcs.exe.so > These are not shared lib's in the normal sense. I do not believe that a linker would be able to load them. They are pre-compiled (to binary) images that are generated by the mono jit (or aot most prob) compiler and are used to speed up load times ( as there is no jit compulation overhead ) They have the wonderful ability to be both statically and dynamically linked at the same time :) $ file /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped $ ldd /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so statically linked Therefore no LDFLAGS. Sadly mono chose to use *.so
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #1) > > > > * QA Notice: Files built without respecting LDFLAGS have been detected > > * Please include the following list of files in your report: > > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/mscorlib.dll.so > > * /usr/lib/mono/4.0/dmcs.exe.so > > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so > > * /usr/lib/mono/2.0/gmcs.exe.so > > > These are not shared lib's in the normal sense. I do not believe that a linker > would be able to load them. They are pre-compiled (to binary) images that are > generated by the mono jit (or aot most prob) compiler and are used to speed up > load times ( as there is no jit compulation overhead ) > > They have the wonderful ability to be both statically and dynamically linked at > the same time :) > > $ file /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so > /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, > version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped > $ ldd /usr/lib/mono/2.0/mscorlib.dll.so > statically linked > > Therefore no LDFLAGS. Sadly mono chose to use *.so > Are you sure they are used or not? Looks like Fedora people think that not, and also a link I pointed in comments in mono-2.8.1-r1.ebuild
x86 stable
amd64 done
ppc will do 2.10 directly as talked with ranger -> bug #359651
