Bug 277888

Summary:	net-im/mcabber-0.9.9 fails to build with gpgme-1.2.0
Product:	Gentoo Linux	Reporter:	Andrew Savchenko <bircoph>
Component:	Current packages	Assignee:	Gentoo Net-im project <net-im>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	normal	CC:	fauli, wschlich
Priority:	High
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	x86
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---
Bug Depends on:	362239
Bug Blocks:	277890
Attachments:	fix LFS support build.log fix

Description Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev

2009-07-15 06:05:36 UTC

gpgme-1.2.0 requires all client programs to define LFS support in the same way as it does itself, thus gpgme fails without -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 on x86.

This bug is similar to 277701 and 277886. Perhaps I should open a tracker...

Comment 1 Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev

2009-07-15 06:07:10 UTC

Created attachment 198015 [details, diff]
fix LFS support

Comment 2 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-07-22 18:18:17 UTC

*** Bug 278722 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Wolfram Schlich (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-07-30 13:10:57 UTC

Fixed in 0.9.9-r1, thanks!

Comment 4 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-07-30 14:44:18 UTC

Can we stabilise that version as soon as possible?

Comment 5 Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev

2009-08-08 21:49:01 UTC

It still fails to compile due to a typo in ebuild:
use crypt && x86 && append-flags -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 # bug #27788

"use" before "x86" is missed.

Comment 6 Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev

2009-08-08 21:50:32 UTC

Created attachment 200628 [details]
build.log

Comment 7 Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev

2009-08-08 21:53:33 UTC

Created attachment 200629 [details, diff]
fix

Comment 8 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-08-08 21:55:00 UTC

-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 should be used on all 32-bit architectures.

Comment 9 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-08-08 22:02:28 UTC

I fixed this bug.

Comment 10 Wolfram Schlich (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2009-09-02 09:57:11 UTC

(In reply to comment #9)
> I fixed this bug.

Thanks :)