Bug 319047 – dev-lang/python-2.4.6 fails w/ multiple undefined reference to and doesn't die

• Status: RESOLVED INVALID
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Justin Lecher (RETIRED) 2010-05-09 10:51:44 UTC]

It spits many undefined references but doesn't die in build only on install. Also with single build.

[Comment 1 Justin Lecher (RETIRED) 2010-05-09 10:52:40 UTC]

Created attachment 230851 [details]
/var/tmp/portage/dev-lang/python-2.4.6/temp/build.log

build.log

[Comment 2 Harald van Dijk (RETIRED) 2010-05-09 20:19:14 UTC]

> -Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common,--as-needed,--no-undefined

Forcing -Wl,--no-undefined on all packages is a very bad idea. It's one of those "broken by design" options, that can be useful if you write your own package knowing you're going to use it, but that will cause havoc on existing bug-free packages. Undefined symbols in shared libraries, especially in the case of modules (as it is here), need not be a problem, which is why the linker defaults to allowing this. Please drop it from your LDFLAGS.

[Comment 3 Justin Lecher (RETIRED) 2010-05-10 05:59:21 UTC]

(In reply to comment #2)
> > -Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common,--as-needed,--no-undefined
> 
> Forcing -Wl,--no-undefined on all packages is a very bad idea. It's one of
> those "broken by design" options, that can be useful if you write your own
> package knowing you're going to use it, but that will cause havoc on existing
> bug-free packages. Undefined symbols in shared libraries, especially in the
> case of modules (as it is here), need not be a problem, which is why the linker
> defaults to allowing this. Please drop it from your LDFLAGS.
> 
Oh damn, you are right. I did put it in for testing, but forgot to remove it afterwards. Sorry for the trouble.