/var/tmp/portage/dev-util/kcov-33/work/kcov-33/src/parsers/bfd-address-verifier.cc: In constructor ‘BfdAddressVerifier::BfdAddressVerifier()’: /var/tmp/portage/dev-util/kcov-33/work/kcov-33/src/parsers/bfd-address-verifier.cc:26:20: error: ‘print_insn_i386’ was not declared in this scope m_disassembler = print_insn_i386; ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ make[2]: *** [src/CMakeFiles/kcov.dir/build.make:391: src/CMakeFiles/kcov.dir/parsers/bfd-address-verifier.cc.o] Error 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------- This is an unstable amd64 chroot image at a tinderbox (==build bot) name: 13.0-desktop_20170905-225247 ------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc-config -l: [1] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-6.4.0 * Available Python interpreters, in order of preference: [1] python3.4 [2] python3.6 (fallback) [3] python2.7 (fallback) [4] pypy3 (fallback) [5] jython2.7 (fallback) Available Ruby profiles: [1] ruby22 (with Rubygems) * java-config: The following VMs are available for generation-2: *) IcedTea JDK 3.5.1 [icedtea-bin-8] Available Java Virtual Machines: [1] icedtea-bin-8 system-vm emerge -qpv dev-util/kcov [ebuild R ] dev-util/kcov-33
Created attachment 495000 [details] emerge-info.txt
Created attachment 495002 [details] dev-util:kcov-33:20170916-123150.log
Created attachment 495004 [details] emerge-history.txt
Created attachment 495006 [details] environment
Created attachment 495008 [details] etc.portage.tbz2
Created attachment 495010 [details] logs.tbz2
Created attachment 495012 [details] temp.tbz2
This seems to be fixed in the latest release: https://github.com/SimonKagstrom/kcov/blob/v34/ChangeLog#L2
(In reply to Stefan Linke from comment #8) > This seems to be fixed in the latest release: > https://github.com/SimonKagstrom/kcov/blob/v34/ChangeLog#L2 I wasn't able to reproduce with binutils-2.29-r1. Anyway, I added kcov-34, so hopefully that solves this. https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=5d1cfbfb0969d506e72d4bdf1bdf1f888a92d794 Can someone affected please retest with kcov-34?
kcov-34 emerges fine at current images and at this particular image too (well, your question came just in time, in few days I'll nuke the 2.2 TB data partition holding this image in favour of a new one)
(In reply to Toralf Förster from comment #10) > kcov-34 emerges fine at current images and at this particular image too > (well, your question came just in time, in few days I'll nuke the 2.2 TB > data partition holding this image in favour of a new one) Thanks.
