Bug 19638 – redhat-artwork-0.65.ebuild fails to compile with gcc 2.95.3

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description John Youells 2003-04-19 19:42:38 UTC]

Compile fails using gcc 2.95.3 (gentoo 1.2) because of a syntax error. This does
not occur with  gcc 3.2 (gentoo 1.4). 

In redhatclient.cpp:

line 896: 
 if( not isLeft)
change it to:
 if ( !isLeft)
then it compiles fine and installs.

[Comment 1 John Youells 2003-04-19 20:05:55 UTC]

I am not sure if this is the best fix. Otherwise the ebuild will always fail with gcc 2.95.3 with the following error:

redhatclient.cpp:896: parse error before `)'
redhatclient.cpp:902: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
make[5]: *** [redhatclient.lo] Error 1
make[5]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/redhat-artwork-0.65/work/redhat-artwork-0.65/art/kde/kwin/Bluecurve'
make[4]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/redhat-artwork-0.65/work/redhat-artwork-0.65/art/kde/kwin'
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 

[Comment 2 John Youells 2003-05-11 02:08:46 UTC]

redhat-artwork-0.73, which hit portage ~x86 today has the same bug and the same fix when using gcc 2.95.3 as redhat-artwork-0.65. 

[Comment 3 Alastair Tse (RETIRED) 2003-05-11 07:15:25 UTC]

well, can you attach the complete error message or the whole build log?

[Comment 4 John Youells 2003-05-12 02:17:09 UTC]

Created attachment 11812 [details, diff]
a diff for redhatclient.cpp

this patch can be added at the end of the src_unpack() function of the
redhat-artwork-0.73.ebuild.

[Comment 5 John Youells 2003-05-12 02:22:52 UTC]

I have created a diff for the file redhatclient.cpp but I don't know how to create a conditional patch that depends on gcc-version. I attempted to use the conditional patching based on gcc-version used in the xfree-4.3.0-r2.ebuild but that did not work. As a guick hack I added:
epatch ${FILESDIR}/redhat-artwork-gcc-2.95.3.patch || die
  to the end of the src_unpack() for the ebuild and that built and installed correctly. If anyone knows how to do it correctly.... 

[Comment 6 Alastair Tse (RETIRED) 2003-05-12 05:00:04 UTC]

thanks for the patch. looks good, maybe i missed the memo about gcc3 accepting python like syntax :/ (since when can you define "if (not blah)" in C++? maybe i've remembered the reason why i hate c++.) don't worry it doesn't need to be a conditional thing. it works for gcc3 as well.

i'm applying this to all versions since 0.63. btw, in the future, could you use diff -u for patches? thanks.