Summary: | sys-devel/binutils-2.39[gprofng]: gprofng not functional (configuration error: can not find libgp-collector.so. run aborted) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Sam James <sam> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Toolchain Maintainers <toolchain> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | neotheuser |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
See Also: |
https://bugs.debian.org/1016725 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28972 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30043 |
||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | build.log |
Description
Sam James
2022-08-13 20:33:54 UTC
Created attachment 799823 [details]
build.log
Possibly related, I have this issue:
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/binutils-2.39/work/binutils-2.39/gprofng/libcollector/mmaptrace.c:1286:18: error: no member named '__builtin___snprintf_chk' in 'struct CollectorUtilFuncs'
1 warning and 2 errors generated.
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/binutils-2.39/work/binutils-2.39/gprofng/libcollector/envmgmt.c:187:15: error: no member named '__builtin___snprintf_chk' in 'struct CollectorUtilFuncs'
build.log attached
(In reply to Alec Ari from comment #1) > Created attachment 799823 [details] > build.log > > Possibly related, I have this issue: > > /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/binutils-2.39/work/binutils-2.39/gprofng/ > libcollector/mmaptrace.c:1286:18: error: no member named > '__builtin___snprintf_chk' in 'struct CollectorUtilFuncs' > > 1 warning and 2 errors generated. > > /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/binutils-2.39/work/binutils-2.39/gprofng/ > libcollector/envmgmt.c:187:15: error: no member named > '__builtin___snprintf_chk' in 'struct CollectorUtilFuncs' > > build.log attached This is probably unrelated. Could you file a new bug please with the full build.log (as you did here) & emerge --info? We need to adapt binutils-config's handling of LIBPATH, I think, to allow taking multiple entries (delimiter of colon?) As a hack, this works (please don't do this -- if you do, clean it up immediately!): (cd /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/binutils-bin/lib/gprofng && cp -rv /usr/lib64/binutils/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/2.39/gprofng/* .) && gprofng collect app bash The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=6676442e3694fcd557ffdbffb028b9ee1fe6d830 commit 6676442e3694fcd557ffdbffb028b9ee1fe6d830 Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2022-08-26 08:32:53 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2022-08-26 08:33:34 +0000 sys-devel/binutils: make gprofng optional (masked USE flag) We can enable this by default in future, but it's brand new in 2.39 with several bugs: - Doesn't build on musl (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29477) - No man pages (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29521) - Broken at runtime without Java (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29479) - binutils-config (and this ebuild?) needs adaptation first (https://bugs.gentoo.org/865113) Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/865113 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> profiles/base/package.use.mask | 4 ++++ sys-devel/binutils/binutils-2.39.ebuild | 10 +++++++++- sys-devel/binutils/binutils-9999.ebuild | 10 +++++++++- sys-devel/binutils/metadata.xml | 1 + 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> sys-devel/binutils: make gprofng optional (masked USE flag)
>
> We can enable this by default in future, but it's brand new
> in 2.39 with several bugs:
> - Doesn't build on musl
> (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29477)
> - No man pages (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29521)
> - Broken at runtime without Java
> (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29479)
> - binutils-config (and this ebuild?) needs adaptation first
> (https://bugs.gentoo.org/865113)
>
OK since it's hardmasked for now, let's also ignore it in terms of stabilization for now.
The bugs I've just added to See Also imply this might be a upstream issue. (In reply to Sam James from comment #6) > The bugs I've just added to See Also imply this might be a upstream issue. Yeah, if I apply these locally, it seems to work. The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=70798e86503c74be435ea880a249e18e8a6e0a38 commit 70798e86503c74be435ea880a249e18e8a6e0a38 Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-02-08 21:58:47 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-02-08 23:09:36 +0000 profiles/base: unmask gprofng for newer binutils Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/865113 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> profiles/base/package.use.mask | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) |