Summary: | sys-apps/systemd-218-r5 : /.../mtd_probe.h:24:9: error: unknown type name ‘uint32_t’ | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Toralf Förster <toralf> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo systemd Team <systemd> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=630086 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
config.log
emerge-history.txt environment etc.portage.tbz2 sys-apps:systemd-218-r5:20161223-031814.log.bz2 |
Description
Toralf Förster
2016-12-23 09:55:20 UTC
Created attachment 457206 [details]
config.log
Created attachment 457208 [details]
emerge-history.txt
Created attachment 457210 [details]
environment
Created attachment 457212 [details]
etc.portage.tbz2
Created attachment 457214 [details]
sys-apps:systemd-218-r5:20161223-031814.log.bz2
Why are you testing such an old version on an unstable tinderbox? (In reply to Mike Gilbert from comment #6) The tinderbox masks a particular failed package version to avoid useless emerge runs. Masking all package versions below the current failed version would however prevent the tinderbox to test a lot of (dependent) packages. Question is rather how to avoid reporting bugs for too old versions (OTOH in this case the systemd version 218 is marked stable and shouldn't have known bugs, or ?). (In reply to Toralf Förster from comment #7) > Question is rather how to avoid reporting bugs for too old versions (OTOH in > this case the systemd version 218 is marked stable and shouldn't have known > bugs, or ?). The only reason 218 is still in the tree is because ppc64 took the better part of a year to stabilize 226. I have not been fixing any bugs in 218 for quite some time. If you are running a ~arch tinderbox, I expect that you would test ~arch systemd, not the oldest version in the tree. |