| Summary: | sys-libs/glibc doesn't like the new binutils | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Ryan Hill (RETIRED) <rhill> |
| Component: | [OLD] Core system | Assignee: | Gentoo Toolchain Maintainers <toolchain> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | arfrever, eric_chaligny, jdaluz, navid.zamani |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2009-09/msg00009.html | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
Output of patching glibc-2.10.1 with the patch mentioned in commend #1
the Navid-friendly version |
||
|
Description
Ryan Hill (RETIRED)
2009-09-10 01:24:38 UTC
(In reply to comment #1) > http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=patch;h=4c14c8c348ee3e9a5fea3608cabcabdb275b6141 Uum… do I just patch the source with that? Your message is a bit… short… ^^ Who will do the ebuild and put in into Portage? Created attachment 204136 [details, diff] Output of patching glibc-2.10.1 with the patch mentioned in commend #1 I just tried that patch, by modifying the ebuild as follows: > eblit-src_unpack-post() { > ? > einfo "Patching bug 284393 (sys-libs/glibc doesn't like the new binutils)" > epatch "${FILESDIR}"/2.10.1-r1/new-binutils.patch …, calling it glibc-2.10.1-r1, and using the file linked in comment #1 as “new-binutils.patch”. The result was that the patch failed with the output in the attached file. :/ Ah great. Now that failed emerge with your patch killed my original »emerge -e world«, which was at 860 of 1304 packages and had compiled since yesterday noon! Thank you VERY much, Ryan. :( I HATE that bug :/ (I’m Going to file a report for that one! :) Created attachment 204151 [details, diff]
the Navid-friendly version
sorry, i assumed that if you're using a masked binutils version you would know how to apply a patch from upstream. :P
you forgot to cd "${S}" before epatch, but the patch would have failed anyways because of the Changelog hunk. here's one that will apply.
(In reply to comment #5) > sorry, i assumed that if you're using a masked binutils version you would know > how to apply a patch from upstream. :P It’s ok. I accept being called stupid for this. ^^ /me is living on the edge. The best way to learn, is to crash and burn. :P > you forgot to cd "${S}" before epatch, but the patch would have failed anyways > because of the Changelog hunk. here's one that will apply. Thank you. :) I thought epatch would do this automatically. But I should have read the epatch documentation I guess. P.S.: You have won one free question about Haskell, game design, psychology, nutrition science, neural nets, or the worst quirks of the "beloved" Internet Explorer… in case you might need it. ;) I had to play with glibc today so I added this one, hope toolchain don't mind. (In reply to comment #7) > I had to play with glibc today so I added this one, hope toolchain don't mind. Hmm… Is there something I don’t understand? Because I don’t see how this resolves the issue…? ^^ (In reply to comment #8) > Is there something I don’t understand? Because I don’t see how this resolves > the issue…? Maybe run `emerge --sync`. |