Bug 469768 – media-libs/mesa with sys-libs/uclibc - execinfo.h missing

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED UPSTREAM

[Description pmn 2013-05-14 02:01:39 UTC]

mesa won't build without this patch on uclibc systems.

Reproducible: Always

[Comment 1 pmn 2013-05-14 02:02:24 UTC]

Created attachment 348204 [details, diff]
don't include execinfo.h on systems with uclibc

[Comment 2 Anthony Basile 2013-05-28 14:57:05 UTC]

Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've been using.

Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is

    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782

If not I can do it.

[Comment 3 pmn 2013-05-28 21:27:29 UTC]

(In reply to Anthony Basile from comment #2)
> Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what
> happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out
> debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is
> the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've
> been using.
> 
> Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is
> 
>     https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
> 
> If not I can do it.

i would appreciate if you could. at the moment i don't have an up-to-date uclibc system to keep up with question they might have upstream (waiting for updated amd64 stage3's). i'm writing this from an alpine/gentoo system i put together last year...

[Comment 4 Anthony Basile 2013-05-28 21:33:45 UTC]

(In reply to darwinskernel from comment #3)
> (In reply to Anthony Basile from comment #2)
> > Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what
> > happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out
> > debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is
> > the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've
> > been using.
> > 
> > Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is
> > 
> >     https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
> > 
> > If not I can do it.
> 
> i would appreciate if you could. at the moment i don't have an up-to-date
> uclibc system to keep up with question they might have upstream (waiting for
> updated amd64 stage3's). i'm writing this from an alpine/gentoo system i put
> together last year...

No problem I already spoke to one of the mesa devs.

[Comment 5 Anthony Basile 2013-05-28 23:07:31 UTC]

Its upstream.

[Comment 6 Anthony Basile 2013-05-29 15:13:30 UTC]

Upstream has pushed the patch.