https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2020/07/04/gentoo-tinderbox/ Issue: net-misc/netkit-telnetd-0.17-r12 fails to compile. Discovered on: amd64 (internal ref: tinderbox_musl) NOTE: This machine uses MUSL libc
Created attachment 764179 [details] build.log build log and emerge --info
(In reply to Agostino Sarubbo from comment #0) > https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2020/07/04/gentoo-tinderbox/ > > Issue: net-misc/netkit-telnetd-0.17-r12 fails to compile. > Discovered on: amd64 (internal ref: tinderbox_musl) > > NOTE: > This machine uses MUSL libc Is it acceptable to just mask the package on the musl profile?
(In reply to Paolo Pedroni from comment #2) > (In reply to Agostino Sarubbo from comment #0) > > https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2020/07/04/gentoo-tinderbox/ > > > > Issue: net-misc/netkit-telnetd-0.17-r12 fails to compile. > > Discovered on: amd64 (internal ref: tinderbox_musl) > > > > NOTE: > > This machine uses MUSL libc > > Is it acceptable to just mask the package on the musl profile? in this case, I think so, given I think it simply can't work, but see if this feature can be disable. If not, ye, mask. Even openembedded gave up for this one: https://cgit.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-networking/recipes-netkit/netkit-telnet/netkit-telnet_0.17.bb#n70
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=9f4e6a443ffe25c75e91ea0f550b2db29d80d851 commit 9f4e6a443ffe25c75e91ea0f550b2db29d80d851 Author: PPed72 <paolo.pedroni@iol.it> AuthorDate: 2022-02-07 14:02:10 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2022-02-09 11:21:44 +0000 profile/features/musl: mask net-misc/netkit-telnetd Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/832551 Signed-off-by: Paolo Pedroni <paolo.pedroni@iol.it> Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/24113 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> profiles/features/musl/package.mask | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)