Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 831515 - xorg-server-API-rename.patch missing in x11-drivers/xf86-video-nouveau-1.0.17::gentoo_tree and breaks build
Summary: xorg-server-API-rename.patch missing in x11-drivers/xf86-video-nouveau-1.0.17...
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2022-01-20 05:15 UTC by John (EBo) David
Modified: 2022-01-20 06:26 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description John (EBo) David 2022-01-20 05:15:30 UTC
Not sure if this is the place to report this since https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo does not support issues.

The most recent update to x11-drivers/xf86-video-nouveau-1.0.17::gentoo_tree apparently removed a patch which causes the following error:

nv_driver.c: In function ‘Kredisplay_dirty’:
nv_driver.c:562:43: error: ’struct _PixmapDirtyUpdate’ has no member named ‘slave_dst’

The main tree includes this patch, and the package builds without issue.
Comment 1 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-01-20 05:20:08 UTC
Yes, this is the correct place to report bugs.

Please share the full buiild.log of the failure. I don't know what ::gentoo_tree is, but the main repository is ::gentoo and the patch is still there...
Comment 2 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-01-20 05:21:50 UTC
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> Yes, this is the correct place to report bugs.
> 
> Please share the full buiild.log of the failure. I don't know what
> ::gentoo_tree is, but the main repository is ::gentoo and the patch is still
> there...

... furthermore, sharing emerge --info would help too.
Comment 3 John (EBo) David 2022-01-20 05:39:11 UTC
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo is part of the Proxy Maintainer infrastructure.  While I was writing this bug report I realized that I bypassed the proxy tree and rebuild using the main tree -- which blew away my build log.  I was planning to go back, rebuild using the proxy tree ebuild, attach the 'emerge --info', but you beat me to the punch with the request.

Since you have already marked this as invalid and resolved, there is no reason bother you further.
Comment 4 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-01-20 05:43:26 UTC
(In reply to John (EBo) David from comment #3)
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo is part of the Proxy Maintainer
> infrastructure.  While I was writing this bug report I realized that I
> bypassed the proxy tree and rebuild using the main tree -- which blew away
> my build log.  I was planning to go back, rebuild using the proxy tree
> ebuild, attach the 'emerge --info', but you beat me to the punch with the
> request.
> 
> Since you have already marked this as invalid and resolved, there is no
> reason bother you further.

You're free to share it still, it's just what we do. It's not meant to be offensive!

But https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo is definitely up to date and there is no official ::gentoo_tree repository (I don't know what that is). I think you might have a branch that you're using as a repository which isn't up to date?
Comment 5 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-01-20 05:46:02 UTC
(In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
> (In reply to John (EBo) David from comment #3)
> > https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo is part of the Proxy Maintainer
> > infrastructure.  While I was writing this bug report I realized that I
> > bypassed the proxy tree and rebuild using the main tree -- which blew away
> > my build log.  I was planning to go back, rebuild using the proxy tree
> > ebuild, attach the 'emerge --info', but you beat me to the punch with the
> > request.
> > 
> > Since you have already marked this as invalid and resolved, there is no
> > reason bother you further.
> 
> You're free to share it still, it's just what we do. It's not meant to be
> offensive!
> 
> But https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo is definitely up to date and there is
> no official ::gentoo_tree repository (I don't know what that is). I think
> you might have a branch that you're using as a repository which isn't up to
> date?

... and given it's a user-support question, as we don't have any such repository, it's better suited to forums or IRC.
Comment 6 John (EBo) David 2022-01-20 05:57:33 UTC
I was not offended, and had not meant to offend either.  What is weird is my repository reports that it is up to date, but the patch at the bottom of the file and the patches in the 'files' directory are missing.  At this point I will blow that away and start clean.  This is really weird as the package was building fine until tonight when I ran my daily update.  I just hope I do not have a disk going out, but that selectively makes no sense.

Sorry for the noise.  Something appears to be corrupted in my one of my repositories.
Comment 7 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-01-20 06:02:33 UTC
(In reply to John (EBo) David from comment #6)
> I was not offended, and had not meant to offend either.  What is weird is my
> repository reports that it is up to date, but the patch at the bottom of the
> file and the patches in the 'files' directory are missing.  At this point I
> will blow that away and start clean.  This is really weird as the package
> was building fine until tonight when I ran my daily update.  I just hope I
> do not have a disk going out, but that selectively makes no sense.
> 
> Sorry for the noise.  Something appears to be corrupted in my one of my
> repositories.

No worries, I just didn't want to have upset you with the "resolution" (I've been told off for sometimes responding to bugs which look like they might be not-actionable but not closing them in some way, as it leads to other people reading them)! All good :)

Very happy to debug this with you on IRC or something if that's helpful.. it sounds really weird though. My suspicion is something like:
- adding ::gentoo_tree as your git clone of https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo
- you checkout a branch to do a PR
- you submit a PR
- you leave that same branch checked out

then the clone gets possibly not synced but at the very least the branch won't get updated, and you only realise it's broken now because of the slot-rebuild forced by stabilisation of newer xorg-server in bug 831378?

Maybe something along those lines?
Comment 8 John (EBo) David 2022-01-20 06:26:31 UTC
All good.  Yea.  It looks like something similar to what you describe.  When I drilled down, the file in my forked version of the repository was 6 months old (2 more than the official repository), and it was missing the patch...  Mystery solved.

Thanks for everything, and my apologies for not figuring this out before posting.