Bug 136136 – Update nxcomp-1.3.2-r1 ebuild with gcc34 patch.

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Clemmitt M. Sigler 2006-06-08 19:14:37 UTC]

Hi,

I couldn't get net-misc/nxcomp-1.3.2-r1 (currently the stable version) to build under gcc V3.4.  I did a little googling and found a patch to get it to build.  I found the working patch at this URL:

http://www.rocklinux.net/sources/package/avm/nx-x11/gcc34.diff

Next I'll attach a .tar.gz file of my changes to the /usr/portage/net-misc/nxcomp portage subtree.  YMMV; I don't know if this patch breaks builds under gcc V3.3.  HTH.

[Comment 1 Clemmitt M. Sigler 2006-06-08 19:18:17 UTC]

Created attachment 88734 [details]
.tar.gz of changes to net-misc/nxcomp portage subtree

This .tar.gz includes updated files for the net-misc/nxcomp portage subtree along with the originals.

[Comment 2 Ryan Hill (RETIRED) 2006-07-16 20:42:34 UTC]

alternatively, bumping nxcomp-1.5.0-r1 to stable would fix this bug as well as pave the way for GCC 4.1 going stable (bug #140707).

[Comment 3 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2006-07-19 01:57:12 UTC]

Stabilise nxcomp-1.5.0-r2 please and cc arches if there are no obstacles (I see no bugs left to that version)

[Comment 4 Chris Gianelloni (RETIRED) 2006-08-08 15:32:50 UTC]

Any word on this?  GCC 4.1.1 should be going stable soon and this needs to be resolved first.

[Comment 5 Chris Gianelloni (RETIRED) 2006-08-23 14:23:47 UTC]

If there's no word on this by August 25th/26th, then I'm just going to go ahead an mark the newer version stable on amd64/x86 after making sure it works.  If you have any objections, speak them now.

[Comment 6 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2006-08-24 23:52:33 UTC]

wolf31o2, so please go on stabilizing

[Comment 7 Stuart Herbert (RETIRED) 2006-08-25 04:06:59 UTC]

No go.  You have to stabilise all nx*-1.5 packages as a group, or not at all.  NX-1.5 is an old version; upstream are now on NX-2.0.

I'm just the proxy maintainer for NX these days.  I'll check with the guys who maintain the packages.  If you don't hear from me by the 25th, the best thing to do would be to mask NX until we can get the NX-2.0 packages into Portage.

Please don't stabilise NX-1.5 unless you're willing to provide support for NX-1.5 bugs.

Best regards,
Stu

[Comment 8 Ryan Hill (RETIRED) 2006-09-04 21:38:50 UTC]

(In reply to comment #7)
> I'm just the proxy maintainer for NX these days.  I'll check with the guys who
> maintain the packages.  If you don't hear from me by the 25th, the best thing
> to do would be to mask NX until we can get the NX-2.0 packages into Portage.
> 
> Please don't stabilise NX-1.5 unless you're willing to provide support for
> NX-1.5 bugs.

So should we mask this then?

[Comment 9 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) 2006-10-15 17:11:06 UTC]

x86, drop the stable keyword please, it doesn't compile.

[Comment 10 Joshua Jackson (RETIRED) 2006-10-16 19:49:49 UTC]

Stuart, any update about this? Should we simply drop the keyword at this point as  2.0 has not made it into the tree?

[Comment 11 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) 2006-10-23 04:17:14 UTC]

*** Bug 152517 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Comment 12 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2006-11-04 16:24:08 UTC]

I remove us, as nxcomp will vanish soon as I just read on Planet.