Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 469768 - media-libs/mesa with sys-libs/uclibc - execinfo.h missing
Summary: media-libs/mesa with sys-libs/uclibc - execinfo.h missing
Status: RESOLVED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Library (show other bugs)
Hardware: AMD64 Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo X packagers
URL: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug...
Whiteboard:
Keywords: PATCH
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-05-14 02:01 UTC by pmn
Modified: 2013-05-29 15:13 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Attachments
don't include execinfo.h on systems with uclibc (u_debug_symbol.patch,591 bytes, patch)
2013-05-14 02:02 UTC, pmn 		Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description pmn 2013-05-14 02:01:39 UTC 
mesa won't build without this patch on uclibc systems.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 pmn 2013-05-14 02:02:24 UTC 
Created attachment 348204 [details, diff]
don't include execinfo.h on systems with uclibc
Comment 2 Anthony Basile gentoo-dev 2013-05-28 14:57:05 UTC 
Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've been using.

Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is

    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782

If not I can do it.
Comment 3 pmn 2013-05-28 21:27:29 UTC 
(In reply to Anthony Basile from comment #2)
> Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what
> happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out
> debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is
> the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've
> been using.
> 
> Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is
> 
>     https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
> 
> If not I can do it.

i would appreciate if you could. at the moment i don't have an up-to-date uclibc system to keep up with question they might have upstream (waiting for updated amd64 stage3's). i'm writing this from an alpine/gentoo system i put together last year...
Comment 4 Anthony Basile gentoo-dev 2013-05-28 21:33:45 UTC 
(In reply to darwinskernel from comment #3)
> (In reply to Anthony Basile from comment #2)
> > Yeah, I submitted a patch upstream but it got changed.  Not sure what
> > happened.  The correct patch was supposed to block out
> > debug_symbol_name_glibc() as well as the include execinfo.h.  Your patch is
> > the correct fix to the botched original and is almost identical to one I've
> > been using.
> > 
> > Do you feel like shepherding it through upstream?  The original bug is
> > 
> >     https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
> > 
> > If not I can do it.
> 
> i would appreciate if you could. at the moment i don't have an up-to-date
> uclibc system to keep up with question they might have upstream (waiting for
> updated amd64 stage3's). i'm writing this from an alpine/gentoo system i put
> together last year...

No problem I already spoke to one of the mesa devs.
Comment 5 Anthony Basile gentoo-dev 2013-05-28 23:07:31 UTC 
Its upstream.
Comment 6 Anthony Basile gentoo-dev 2013-05-29 15:13:30 UTC 
Upstream has pushed the patch.