Home | Docs | Forums | Lists | Bugs | Planet | Store | GMN | Get Gentoo!
Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.
View Bug Activity | Format For Printing | XML | Clone This Bug
core issue here seems to be with libsdl ... here's some example error messages: {standard input}:32495: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `xchg' {standard input}:32525: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `xchg' {standard input}:2190: Error: bad register name `%' {standard input}:2213: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `xchg' {standard input}:2228: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `xchg' all appear to be with byteswapping functions, usually in network related functions ... currently known to be broken: sdl-net sdl-perl sdl-mixer
*** Bug 76218 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
err forgot to note, this is happening with 1.2.8 but not with 1.2.8
*** Bug 76395 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 77291 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
blah, i mean this is a problem when using libsdl-1.2.8, but not libsdl-1.2.7
for sanity's sake, i verified this happens with gcc-3.3.5-r1 as well as gcc-3.4.3-r1 ... i'll e-mail upstream
Created an attachment (id=48076) [edit] SDL_endian-patch.h any package that uses the SDL_Swap* funcs seem to be bombing this is the cvs diff between 1.2.7 and 1.2.8 ... if some gcc guru's could track down why these chunks of inline asm code fail under high optimizations, that'd be cool :P
*** Bug 77513 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
seems to be a binutils issue, and the following tested broken :/ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.15.90.0.1.1 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.15.92.0.2 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.15.94.0.2
*** Bug 77675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I posted a bug on this (#77675), I got it working right by using -O0 compiler flag. So, I guess this have something to do with the optimizer.
*** Bug 77785 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
ok, they just merged a fix upstream in libsdl to fix this ... i'll post libsdl-1.2.8-r1 shortly
try out 1.2.8-r1, that fixed it for me in a quick test of emerging sdl-mixer
* Failed Patch: 1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch! * * Include in your bugreport the contents of: * * /var/tmp/portage/libsdl-1.2.8-r1/temp/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch-2934.out Contents: ***** 1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ***** ========================================= PATCH COMMAND: patch -p0 -g0 < /usr/portage/media-libs/libsdl/files/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ========================================= patching file src/video/SDL_pixels.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 22. 1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/video/SDL_pixels.c.rej ========================================= PATCH COMMAND: patch -p1 -g0 < /usr/portage/media-libs/libsdl/files/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ========================================= can't find file to patch at input line 9 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |Index: src/video/SDL_pixels.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /home/sdlweb/libsdl.org/cvs/SDL12/src/video/SDL_pixels.c,v |retrieving revision 1.12 |retrieving revision 1.13 |diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 |--- src/video/SDL_pixels.c 30 Nov 2004 14:28:20 -0000 1.12 |+++ src/video/SDL_pixels.c 12 Jan 2005 19:38:24 -0000 1.13 -------------------------- No file to patch. Skipping patch. 3 out of 3 hunks ignored ========================================= PATCH COMMAND: patch -p2 -g0 < /usr/portage/media-libs/libsdl/files/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ========================================= can't find file to patch at input line 9 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |Index: src/video/SDL_pixels.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /home/sdlweb/libsdl.org/cvs/SDL12/src/video/SDL_pixels.c,v |retrieving revision 1.12 |retrieving revision 1.13 |diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 |--- src/video/SDL_pixels.c 30 Nov 2004 14:28:20 -0000 1.12 |+++ src/video/SDL_pixels.c 12 Jan 2005 19:38:24 -0000 1.13 -------------------------- No file to patch. Skipping patch. 3 out of 3 hunks ignored ========================================= PATCH COMMAND: patch -p3 -g0 < /usr/portage/media-libs/libsdl/files/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ========================================= missing header for unified diff at line 9 of patch can't find file to patch at input line 9 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- -------------------------- |Index: src/video/SDL_pixels.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /home/sdlweb/libsdl.org/cvs/SDL12/src/video/SDL_pixels.c,v |retrieving revision 1.12 |retrieving revision 1.13 |diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 |--- src/video/SDL_pixels.c 30 Nov 2004 14:28:20 -0000 1.12 |+++ src/video/SDL_pixels.c 12 Jan 2005 19:38:24 -0000 1.13 -------------------------- No file to patch. Skipping patch. 3 out of 3 hunks ignored ========================================= PATCH COMMAND: patch -p4 -g0 < /usr/portage/media-libs/libsdl/files/1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch ========================================= missing header for unified diff at line 9 of patch can't find file to patch at input line 9 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -------------------------- |Index: src/video/SDL_pixels.c |=================================================================== |RCS file: /home/sdlweb/libsdl.org/cvs/SDL12/src/video/SDL_pixels.c,v |retrieving revision 1.12 |retrieving revision 1.13 |diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 |--- src/video/SDL_pixels.c 30 Nov 2004 14:28:20 -0000 1.12 |+++ src/video/SDL_pixels.c 12 Jan 2005 19:38:24 -0000 1.13 -------------------------- No file to patch. Skipping patch. 3 out of 3 hunks ignored
From IRC: <SpanKY> [21:07] <CIA-4> vapier * gentoo-x86/media-libs/libsdl/files/ (1.2.8-amd64-endian.patch 1.2.8-direct-8bit-color.patch): remove cvs headers <SpanKY> it's fixed you wanker
*** Bug 77922 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 95972 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
