Summary: | x11-libs/gtk+-3.0.x uses G_CONST_RETURN in headers | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Seth Shelnutt <Shelnutt2> |
Component: | [OLD] GNOME | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team <gnome> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | axiator |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
Build log
backport upstream gdk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12 backport upstream gtk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12 |
Description
Seth Shelnutt
2011-08-19 19:29:20 UTC
Please attach the build.log to the bug (bzip it if it's too large). pastebins are not persistent sources of information. Also, SYNC="git://github.com/funtoo/portage-mini-2010.git" You're not using Gentoo, are you? Please verify with your distro that the problem is not on their end. Created attachment 283947 [details]
Build log
(In reply to comment #1) > Please attach the build.log to the bug (bzip it if it's too large). pastebins > are not persistent sources of information. > > Also, > > SYNC="git://github.com/funtoo/portage-mini-2010.git" > > You're not using Gentoo, are you? Please verify with your distro that the > problem is not on their end. I discussed this on the funtoo irc, and its a gentoo ebuild, pulled from the gentoo repos. No one else had any issues with it, so I decided to file a bug report here. I apologize though if I shouldn't have filed a bug report. (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > > You're not using Gentoo, are you? Please verify with your distro that the > > problem is not on their end. > > I discussed this on the funtoo irc, and its a gentoo ebuild, pulled from the > gentoo repos. No one else had any issues with it, so I decided to file a bug > report here. I apologize though if I shouldn't have filed a bug report. Sorry, but we can't help you with this. As far as I know, no one in the GNOME team is familiar with the setup of Funtoo, nor do we know what problems mixing Gentoo ebuilds with Funtoo packages can cause. We can't help you with a system we don't understand, sorry. This bug is valid, but has it nothing to do with libunique (or with Funtoo). The issue is that Gentoo is shipping fundamental libraries (gtk+, pango, etc.) with G_CONST_RETURN in public headers, and that causes problems for people who are using glib-2.29.x and building a package that for whatever reason added -DG_DISABLE_DEPRECATED to its CFLAGS. And although it may be tempting to ignore problems caused by bleeding-edge glib versions, these issues will crop up again and again in September when glib-2.30 is officially released and people start to upgrade. IMHO, we should just fix fundamental libraries in the tree to be glib-2.29 compatible. Incidentally, Seth, if you just want to build gnome3 with a minimum of problems, you should temporarily downgrade to glib-2.28.x; otherwise, you will run into build errors like this one on every third or fourth package. Created attachment 283965 [details, diff]
backport upstream gdk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12
The G_CONST_RETURN issue was fixed in gtk+-2.24.5 and in the gtk+-3.1.x releases, but remains in the 3.0.x series. Here is a backport of first G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12. The second patch will follow below.
With the two patches applied, gtk+-3.0.12 builds fine under glib-2.29.16 and does not have G_CONST_RETURN macro in public headers.
Created attachment 283967 [details, diff]
backport upstream gtk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12
What's actually to fix (if anything at all - last time I've checked mixing stable and unstable wasn't exactly supported) are (as usual) the packages that add G*_DISABLE_DEPRECATED (and similar) flags into release tarballs. (In reply to comment #6) > Created attachment 283965 [details, diff] > backport upstream gdk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12 > > The G_CONST_RETURN issue was fixed in gtk+-2.24.5 and in the gtk+-3.1.x > releases, but remains in the 3.0.x series. Here is a backport of first > G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12. The second patch will follow > below. > > With the two patches applied, gtk+-3.0.12 builds fine under glib-2.29.16 and > does not have G_CONST_RETURN macro in public headers. (In reply to comment #7) > Created attachment 283967 [details, diff] > backport upstream gtk G_CONST_RETURN removal patch to gtk+-3.0.12 Have you send both patches to upstream for including them in 3.0 branch? (In reply to comment #9) > Have you send both patches to upstream for including them in 3.0 branch? Done: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=658854 +*gtk+-3.0.12-r1 (26 Sep 2011) + + 26 Sep 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> +gtk+-3.0.12-r1.ebuild, + +files/gtk+-3.0.12-use-const.patch: + Use const instead G_CONST_RETURN, bug #379897 by Alexandre Rostovtsev. + |