Summary: | dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1 dev-util/boost-build-1.62.0-r1 stable request | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Pacho Ramos <pacho> | ||||||
Component: | Stabilization | Assignee: | C++ Team [disbanded] <cpp+disabled> | ||||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||||
Severity: | normal | CC: | adrianopol, cwprogram, dennis, herrtimson, office, rr.underwood94 | ||||||
Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | STABLEREQ | ||||||
Version: | unspecified | Flags: | soap:
sanity-check+
|
||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||||
Package list: |
=dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1 alpha amd64 arm arm64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86
=dev-util/boost-build-1.62.0-r1 alpha amd64 arm arm64 hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86
=app-office/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1 amd64 x86
=app-office/libreoffice-bin-debug-5.2.3.3-r1 amd64 x86
|
Runtime testing required: | Yes | ||||||
Bug Depends on: | 592468, 593056, 593512, 600548, 600862, 600996, 601036, 605538, 607324 | ||||||||
Bug Blocks: | 568324, 576742, 604496 | ||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Pacho Ramos
![]() Could we wait till 1.62 is out for this? For 1.62 I'm planning to move the whole boost-dependent ecosystem to C++11, which involves touching a bajillion packages to ensure they also build using -std=c++11. See https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:C%2B%2B/Maintaining_ABI No problem, also, maybe it would be interesting to drop a mail to gentoo-dev ML suggesting people to RDEPEND on dev-libs/boost:= (I see many rev deps still not taking advantage of the subslots ) (In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #2) > No problem, also, maybe it would be interesting to drop a mail to gentoo-dev > ML suggesting people to RDEPEND on dev-libs/boost:= (I see many rev deps > still not taking advantage of the subslots ) Either that or, if someone has a script to fix the deps in all the tree easily... :/ (this is a general problem we have when needing to start using subslots) Created attachment 453956 [details]
reverse depends for boost
I'm attaching a list of packages that depend on boost based on the output of:
pquery -r /home/user/gentoo -n --restrict-revdep dev-libs/boost
(pquery comes from pkgcore. the repo directory as a git checkout of anongit)
When the mpi USE flag is set `virtual/mpi` unstable gets pulled in as a depend, which itself can use one of 6 packages. I'm not too sure if we just want to file one virtual stabilization bug for that, or file one virtual stabilization bug that is blocked on by stablization bugs for each of the virtual providers.
I've finally completed an amd64 stable environment compile of everything (except one) that depends on boost. Here are the final notes: * Current dev-libs/leatherman stable doesn't compile, but dev-libs/leatherman-0.9.3 does. However there's already bug #593512 for stabilizing 0.9.0 which already has an arch stabilized. That in mind I'm not sure if that should be updated to 0.9.3 stabilization bug or if another bug gets filed instead * dev-cpp/luabind is broken. I proposed to have it removed from the tree as per bug #600548 * games-board/pokerth is broken. Is now a stable request bug for -r2 per bug #600862 * games-rpg/valyriatear is blocked by luabind not compiling * virtual/mpi unstable needs stabilization for the mpi USE flag. I didn't create a bug for it since I'm not sure if we want one single bug for the virtual and everything that provides it, or a virtual bug and separate stable request bugs for all the providers * I don't have an environment that I can compile kde-misc/systemd-kcm on, so someone else will need to confirm it compiles okay * dev-python/graph-tool-2.2.44 is broken. It doesn't have an easy solution at the moment. Bug #601036 has more details dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1 - Invalid value for the '-j' option, valid values are 1 through 256 `MAKEOPTS="-j -l4"` is totally valid. But this happens: ">>> Compiling source in /tmp/portage/dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1/work/boost_1_62_0 ... * abi_x86_32.x86: running multilib-minimal_abi_src_compile b2 --user-config=/tmp/portage/dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1/work/boost_1_62_0-abi_x86_32.x86/user-config.jam gentoorelease -j-l4 -q -d+2 -sICU_PATH=/usr --without-mpi --without-locale --without-context --without-coroutine --without-coroutine2 pch=off --boost-build=/usr/share/boost-build --prefix=/tmp/portage/dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1/image/usr --layout=system threading=multi link=shared --without-python Invalid value for the '-j' option, valid values are 1 through 256." Arches please stabilize, target all stable arches =dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1 =dev-util/boost-build-1.62.0-r1 The remaining blockers are * stabilizations (please do them first if applicable for your arch) * and one p-masked lastriting (so doesn't really block). amd64, x86: please synchronize the stabilization commit with new app-office/libreoffice-bin (still to be built, starting that now). Adding libreoffice-bin rebuilt for boost 1.62 to the stabilization list (amd64 and x86 only): =app-office/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1 amd64 x86 =app-office/libreoffice-bin-debug-5.2.3.3-r1 amd64 x86 An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (23 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (23 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
(In reply to Stabilization helper bot from comment #10) > An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors > (23 lines truncated): > > > dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0'] > > dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0'] > > dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0'] That should be provided by the listed boost version in packages list :/ An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (68 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (68 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (68 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
> dependency.bad app-office/libreoffice-bin/libreoffice-bin-5.2.3.3-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['dev-libs/boost:0/1.62.0']
An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (112 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: DEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0) ['=dev-util/boost-build-1.62*']
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: DEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop) ['=dev-util/boost-build-1.62*']
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: DEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['=dev-util/boost-build-1.62*']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: alpha(default/linux/alpha/13.0/desktop/gnome) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
I've stable.masked the mpi useflag, so we can go ahead without waiting for that now. "alpha-unknown-linux-gnu-g++" -ftemplate-depth-128 -mieee -pipe -O2 -mcpu=ev67 -std=c++14 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_CONTEXT_DYN_LINK=1 -DBOOST_CONTEXT_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I"." -c -o "bin.v2/libs/context/build/gcc-4.9/gentoorelease/boost.locale.icu-off/pch-off/threading-multi/unsupported.o" "libs/context/src/unsupported.cpp" libs/context/src/unsupported.cpp:7:2: error: #error "platform not supported" #error "platform not supported" Uh-oh. @ATs, the major blocker has been solved (Boost.Fiber can only be built on amd64 and x86, #605538) and all remaining bugs either require GCC 5 (#601036) or will disappear from the tree in a week (#600548). Please continue stabilization. commit 2126c1dd19c51d46c6e0deb8ca328dbd16ffb409 Author: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> Date: Sun Jan 22 15:31:12 2017 +0100 dev-libs/boost: Build Boost.Fiber only on amd64 and x86 Gentoo-bug: 605538 Stable on alpha. amd64 stable x86 stable Hello, there is one incompatibility of boost-1.62.0 with cmake-3.6.3 (amd64). Current stable cmake (3.6.3) doesn't support boost >= 106200 in its FindBoost.cmake module: https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/v3.6.3/Modules/FindBoost.cmake#L728. cmake-3.7.1 already supports it: https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/v3.7.1/Modules/FindBoost.cmake#L728. As a result, we get a warning > CMake Warning at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindBoost.cmake:743 (message): > Imported targets not available for Boost version 106200 > Call Stack (most recent call first): > /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindBoost.cmake:842 (_Boost_COMPONENT_DEPENDENCIES) > /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindBoost.cmake:1395 (_Boost_MISSING_DEPENDENCIES) > CMakeLists.txt:72 (find_package) and further errors. Is there any chance for a backport to the stable cmake-3.6 or shall one go ahead with 3.7 in case of the boost-upgrade? Created attachment 461436 [details, diff]
FindBoost.cmake: diff between 3.6.3 and 3.7.1
Well, there are some non-trivial changes between cmake-3.6.3 and 3.7.1 that require some thorough inspection. CMake 3.7.2 is stable on amd64 now, so try re-emerging packages that broke. David Seifert, with cmake-3.7.2 this problem is absent for me. (In reply to David Seifert from comment #26) > CMake 3.7.2 is stable on amd64 now, so try re-emerging packages that broke. So we now have stable cmake-3.6.3 which not works with >=boost-1.62 and stable cmake-3.7.2 which works with >=boost-1.62. How we should use this in ebuilds? CMAKE_MIN_VERSION=3.7.2? Or depend <boost1.62? (In reply to nE0sIghT from comment #28) > How we should use this in ebuilds? CMAKE_MIN_VERSION=3.7.2? Or depend > <boost1.62? Yes, this world definitely needs these horrific entanglements. An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (26 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: arm(default/linux/arm/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: ia64(default/linux/ia64/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: ia64(default/linux/ia64/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
Stable for HPPA. An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (26 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: arm(default/linux/arm/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: ia64(default/linux/ia64/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
> dependency.bad virtual/mpi/mpi-2.0-r4.ebuild: RDEPEND: ia64(default/linux/ia64/13.0) ['>=sys-cluster/openmpi-1.10.2-r1[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx?,fortran?,romio?,threads?]']
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #16) > I've stable.masked the mpi useflag, so we can go ahead without waiting for > that now. arm64 ppc ppc64 stable. arm stable. ia64 stable You're requesting stabilization on sparc, but sparc's keywords have been mysteriously dropped in >=boost-1.61.0-r1. WTF. An automated check of this bug failed - repoman reported dependency errors (7 lines truncated):
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: DEPEND: sparc(default/linux/sparc/13.0) ['>=virtual/mpi-2.0-r4[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx,threads]']
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: RDEPEND: sparc(default/linux/sparc/13.0) ['>=virtual/mpi-2.0-r4[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx,threads]']
> dependency.bad dev-libs/boost/boost-1.62.0-r1.ebuild: DEPEND: sparc(default/linux/sparc/13.0/desktop) ['>=virtual/mpi-2.0-r4[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?,cxx,threads]']
(In reply to Matt Turner from comment #37) > You're requesting stabilization on sparc, but sparc's keywords have been > mysteriously dropped in >=boost-1.61.0-r1. WTF. I have no clue why that was done, probably due to sparc generally being a mess. sparc stable |