Summary: | sys-block/tgt-1.0.63 : /.../bs_sg.c:354: undefined reference to `major' | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Toralf Förster <toralf> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Matthew Thode ( prometheanfire ) <prometheanfire> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | cluster, ulm |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
URL: | https://github.com/fujita/tgt/pull/25 | ||
See Also: | https://github.com/fujita/tgt/pull/25 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 575232 | ||
Attachments: |
emerge-history.txt
environment sys-block:tgt-1.0.63:20160420-003627.log |
Description
Toralf Förster
2016-04-20 08:24:28 UTC
Created attachment 431324 [details]
emerge-history.txt
Created attachment 431326 [details]
environment
Created attachment 431328 [details]
sys-block:tgt-1.0.63:20160420-003627.log
not reproduced, closing :( I will say that this seems to be a class of bugs, so if it is really an issue it's more likely to be something like glibc or gcc or something (In reply to Matthew Thode ( prometheanfire ) from comment #4) did you tested it with sys-libs/glibc-2.23-r1 ? r1 is hard masked, you might want to update to r2, iirc, there was a breakage in glibc (In reply to Matthew Thode ( prometheanfire ) from comment #7) And the tinderbox is exactly used to catch those breakage - pls see the tracker for that and the appropriate discussion in the forum - or ask vapier for the back ground. then it's not a problem with this program but with the version of glibc you have installed, (a masked version). (In reply to Matthew Thode ( prometheanfire ) from comment #9) it is not. this package is broken and needs fixing. waiting for glibc to be unmasked and then break people doesn't make sense. glibc-2.23-r1 had a bad bug, commit 5a4fd04815ad2067f36e5baa0d603b4cd1d19381 removed it (it was readded and masked for reasons). If you can reproduce this in glibc-2.23-r2 then I'll consider it valid. (In reply to Matthew Thode ( prometheanfire ) from comment #11) no, it wasn't a bug, and the change is coming back. you can't complain that a new version of glibc breaks things & packages should be fixed first (before unmasking) while simultaneously requiring glibc break things before you'll fix packages. @All: The QA team, amongst other people, already gets plenty of bug e-mail from the tracker bug, so can you please stop changing the status of this bug? (When in doubt, leave it open.) fixed in Gentoo & sent upstream: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=d19be01596dc1d8590b47a5da70f636da7cbdcea |