Summary: | net-irc/xchat-2.8.8-r2 fails to build | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Palmer Dabbelt <palmer> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) (RETIRED) <polynomial-c> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | denis, net-irc |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
Patch that fixes the build
Adds the described patch to xchat-2.8.8.ebuild Patch that fixes the build xchat build log emerge --info xchat emerge --info xchat |
Description
Palmer Dabbelt
2012-06-08 18:00:15 UTC
Created attachment 314717 [details]
Adds the described patch to xchat-2.8.8.ebuild
Let's try something a bit less ugly. Add 4th argument to AM_PATH_GLIB_2_0: 'gmodule'. Created attachment 314723 [details] Patch that fixes the build (In reply to comment #2) > Let's try something a bit less ugly. > Add 4th argument to AM_PATH_GLIB_2_0: 'gmodule'. This new patch works for me, and it's significantly cleaner. The ebuild remains the same. Although I belive you've found a valid bug I'm unable to reproduce this on any of my ~amd64 testmachines with glib-2.32.3. Therefore I'd like to request the full build.log file of the failed build from you as well as the output of "emerge --info xchat". Created attachment 315027 [details]
xchat build log
This the output of
MAKEOPTS="-j1" ebuild xchat-2.8.8-r2.ebuild clean install
using the xchat ebuild from portage (ie, not with the patch suggested in the build).
Created attachment 315029 [details]
emerge --info xchat
This happened to me today, the patch from comment 3 fixed the problem. This was using gcc 4.7.2, 32-bit x86. Created attachment 344034 [details]
emerge --info xchat
Switched from gcc-4.6.3 to gcc-4.7.2 on ~amd64 and xchat now breaks.
I switched from gcc-4.6.3 to gcc-4.7.2 on ~amd64 and xchat now breaks. Submitted my own emerge --info xchat in the attachments. Packages was removed from tree, see bug #460038 |