Summary: | dev-util/pkgconfig-0.22 fails on QA checks - implicit declarations/pointers | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo/Alt | Reporter: | Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) <darkside> |
Component: | Prefix Support | Assignee: | Gentoo non-Linux Team <alt> |
Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | 166763 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED)
2007-09-24 18:31:02 UTC
FEATURES="stricter" is not intended for end users. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 166763 *** Jakub, stricter is not set, take a look at my FEATURES. This is a problem with the source code I think. And we need two bugs for the same issue exactly why? (Complain to prefix folks about this being fatal by default). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 166763 *** I have no clue why this is fatal by default, but it is correct to be fatal, if you read the error message. The patch to this error should be just to include <signal.h> in the offending file somewhere. assigning to alt@gentoo.org per grobian's personal email. Jeremy, what I find worrying, is that you have LDFLAGS set, whereas your CFLAGS is unset. I'd expect the other way around, and in particular don't like the value of your LDFLAGS. What's in there may cause this bug. (In reply to comment #6) > Jeremy, what I find worrying, is that you have LDFLAGS set, whereas your CFLAGS > is unset. I'd expect the other way around, and in particular don't like the > value of your LDFLAGS. What's in there may cause this bug. > Hmm, I thought I had CFLAGS set, I will double check that value and try again when I am able to and get back to you. As for the LDFLAGS, I just followed the linux bootstap guide however I took out the bash expansion because it wasn't expanding right and I was too lasy to manually expand it. Same results with the LDFLAGS expanded out: LDFLAGS="-L/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib64 -L/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib -Wl,-rpath=/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib64 -Wl,-rpath=/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib -L/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/lib64 -L/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/lib -Wl,-rpath=/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/lib64 -Wl,-rpath=/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/lib" CFLAGS is not set on purpose. Still bootstrapping the system. CPPFLAGS is set as: CPPFLAGS=-I/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/include Suggestions on changing the LDFLAGS? I'm not very familar with them. Thanks. I see you are in the bootstrapping phase. It may be problematic here because you use a compiler which is not under our control. What phase of the bootstrapping are you? (In reply to comment #9) > you use a compiler which is not under our control. Ahh, right. Fixed this issue by emerging gcc 4.2.0. Sorry for all the havok - I didn't know that this would cause an issue. Closing as "INVALID" An additional note: I witnessed this when a user mistakenly used the developer profile, which pulled in FEATURES="stricter" Switching to a desktop profile fixed it for him. |