Summary: | dev-lang/swift-5.10.1: Project using SQLite.swift crashes at runtime | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | GURU | Reporter: | colin |
Component: | Package issues | Assignee: | Itai Ferber <itai> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | colin, itai |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | Sample project demonstrating the issue |
Description
colin
2024-09-30 00:42:12 UTC
Created attachment 904223 [details]
Sample project demonstrating the issue
It's possible that the Docker image doesn't build Swift with assertions. Sorry about this! Indeed, I believe the Swift Docker images build without assertions, and we should be doing the same here too. I can confirm the crash trivially, but I haven't had the time yet to rebuild Swift 5.10.1 without assertions to confirm the fix (I'm still trying to get Swift 6.0.1 built and I have limited compute resources) — hoping to get to this soon! Confirmed that compiling Swift without assertions resolves the issue. Fix incoming in swift-5.10.1-r1. The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/proj/guru.git/commit/?id=2a36ac399b06cd73f2be2c7d0df56dc82eb31fb4 commit 2a36ac399b06cd73f2be2c7d0df56dc82eb31fb4 Author: Itai Ferber <itai@itaiferber.net> AuthorDate: 2024-10-13 01:27:34 +0000 Commit: Itai Ferber <itai@itaiferber.net> CommitDate: 2024-10-13 01:31:25 +0000 dev-lang/swift: build without compiler assertions Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/940500 Signed-off-by: Itai Ferber <itai@itaiferber.net> dev-lang/swift/swift-5.10.1-r1.ebuild | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) This needs a new revision as it changes the installed binary (the bug itself involves runtime behaviour). Indeed, the change was introduced in a new revision (-r1) Ah, the commit didn't make it obvious, you're right of course: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/proj/guru.git/log/dev-lang/swift/swift-5.10.1-r1.ebuild. Yeah, sorry — I had a few reasons to introduce -r1 and I didn't want the individual changes to get lost; agreed that it was unclear! (And thanks for checking!) |