| Summary: | avidemux 2.1_pre1 fails to compile with gcc 4.x | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov> |
| Component: | [OLD] GCC Porting | Assignee: | Gentoo Media-video project <media-video> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | dliana, gcc-porting, sfullenwider, therion, zypher |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | 150175 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 117482, 158340 | ||
| Attachments: | fix | ||
|
Description
Matheus Izvekov
2006-06-25 11:27:32 UTC
Created attachment 90127 [details, diff]
fix
Same problem here with gcc 4.1 on an amd64. The attached patch solved the problem here too. Maybe we should report this patch to upstream This fix is quite strange. The majority of changes in the fix are moving functions outside class-scope. So an awfull lot of function-calls in the format xx::yy are renamed to yy. Bad practice if you ask me as it is likely to introduce difficult to find errors and those restrictions are there for a reason. What is the real "fix" is therefore extremely difficult to figure out. I've had no problems compiling avidemux 2.1 with gcc 4.x on ~x86. To know what is going on an emerge --info and error-message would be usefull. (In reply to comment #3) > This fix is quite strange. > The majority of changes in the fix are moving functions outside class-scope. > So an awfull lot of function-calls in the format xx::yy are renamed to yy. > Bad practice if you ask me as it is likely to introduce difficult to find > errors and those restrictions are there for a reason. What is the real "fix" is > therefore extremely difficult to figure out. > > I've had no problems compiling avidemux 2.1 with gcc 4.x on ~x86. > To know what is going on an emerge --info and error-message would be usefull. > No its not strange at all, those are methods not functions, the xx: I removed is the object name the method belongs to. We have to remove it because newer gcc deprecates this.
> No its not strange at all, those are methods not functions, the xx: I removed
> is the object name the method belongs to. We have to remove it because newer
> gcc deprecates this.
>
Good, I did not know that this has been deprecated with GCC 4.1. I stand corrected on misusing functions where I should have said methods.
I however still don't understand why I don't have the same problems compiling on ~x86.
I sent this patch upstream, the author said most of those are already fixed there, but gentoo is too much lagged behind. *** Bug 147833 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 154845 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 160491 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** removed from tree, file a new bug if an issue with 2.3.0 |
