First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 65735
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Gentoo's Team for Core System packages <base-system@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Marc Bevand <bevand_m@epita.fr>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
xfsprogs_ac_proc_cc.patch Patch to fix configure.in patch Marc Bevand 2004-09-28 15:57 0000 238 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 65735 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 65735 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug

Description:   Opened: 2004-09-28 15:56 0000 
The configure script of xfsprogs 2.6.13 is broken (although this is not fatal),
example:

  $ ./configure      # (or emerge xfsprogs)
  [...]
  checking for sys/types.h... no
  [...]
  checking size of long... 0
  [...]

Many header files are not detected, size of C types are reported as being 0,
etc. Surprisingly these errors are not fatal.

To my knowledge, this problem appeared somewhere between 2.3.9 and 2.6.0. And
the fix is simple: just add AC_PROG_CC in configure.in (see the patch I have
posted in the next message) and regenerate the configure script (with
"autoreconf -i" for example).

This problem should be fixed upstream.


Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:

------- Comment #1 From Marc Bevand 2004-09-28 15:57:55 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=40666) [edit]
Patch to fix configure.in

Patch to fix configure.in.
Then you need to regenerate the configure script via "autoreconf -i" for
example.

------- Comment #2 From SpanKY 2004-09-29 11:42:46 0000 ------- 
i assume this applies to 2.6.13 too ?

------- Comment #3 From Marc Bevand 2004-09-30 01:35:02 0000 ------- 
Yes this applies to 2.6.13. Maybe I was not clear enough: versions <=2.3.9 are
ok, versions >=2.6.0 are broken.

------- Comment #4 From SpanKY 2004-10-07 17:08:08 0000 ------- 
when you say 'This problem should be fixed upstream.' you mean it is already
fixed or i should e-mail upstream about it ?

------- Comment #5 From SpanKY 2004-10-07 17:24:13 0000 ------- 
checked their cvs and this isnt present

reported here: http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=366

added to 2.6.13 ebuild, thanks :)
First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug