Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 at 1:05 PM From: akhiezer <[email protected]> To: "BLFS Support List" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [blfs-support] Solid failure in Frameworks-5.25.0 > From: "Cliff McDiarmid" <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 12:17:19 +0200 > Subject: Re: [blfs-support] Solid failure in Frameworks-5.25.0 > > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 at 11:29 PM > From: "Ken Moffat" <[email protected]> > To: "BLFS Support List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [blfs-support] Solid failure in Frameworks-5.25.0 > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:50:30PM +0100, akhiezer wrote: > > > From: "Cliff McDiarmid" <[email protected]> > > > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 20:35:36 +0200 > > > Subject: [blfs-support] Solid failure in Frameworks-5.25.0 > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > Does anyone know what's causing this when building Solid as part of > > > Frameworks? Or has anyone seen this before? > > > > > > > > > [ 40%] Building C object > > > src/solid/CMakeFiles/KF5Solid_static.dir/predicate_lexer.c.o > > > /mnt/home/cliffys/frameworks-5.26.0/solid-5.25.0/build/src/solid/predicate_lexer.c: > > > In function âSolidensure_buffer_stackâ: > > > /mnt/home/cliffys/frameworks-5.26.0/solid-5.25.0/build/src/solid/predicate_lexer.c:1587:21: > > > error: C++ style comments are not allowed in ISO C90 > > > num_to_alloc = 1; // After all that talk, this was set to 1 anyways... > > > ^ > > > > Dealing with the info 'in isolation' - haven't gone back and looked at book > > pages: > > > > either: > > ==== > > * change that line, in: > > /mnt/home/cliffys/frameworks-5.26.0/solid-5.25.0/build/src/solid/predicate_lexer.c > > , to: > > num_to_alloc = 1; /* After all that talk, this was set to 1 anyways... */ > > But you might hit similar issue in other files: so ref following option, > > below. > > > > * or: > > tell the compiler to use an appropriate C version later than 'ISO C90'; or > > at least to be relaxed about such '// ...' comment styles. > > ==== > > > > >Yes, it seems strange that it is setting things up as if for an old > >compiler. > > Not exactly old - Solid-5.25.0 on mine reported > > -- The C compiler identification is GNU 6.1.0 > -- The CXX compiler identification is GNU 6.1.0 > -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/cc > -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/cc -- works > -- Detecting C compiler ABI info > -- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done > -- Detecting C compile features > -- Detecting C compile features - done > -- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ > -- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ -- works > -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info > -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done > -- Detecting CXX compile features > -- Detecting CXX compile features - done > > > >In 7.9-rc1 I had similar output with 5.18, except the compiler was > >5.3.0. I can't go back and compare that source to 5.25.0 because > >http://download.kde.org/stable/frameworks/ has nothing before 5.20, > >but I will be very surprised if '//' comments are a recent addition. > > >So, which compiler are you using, and what does cmake think it is > >when trying to build solid ? Or did you accidentally use some > >CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS to force the version ? > > I would have thought GCC 6.1 would have been fine. Not using CFLAGS or > CXXFLAGS, I use to use them don't anymore. >
>It's not so much the gcc version per se: it's which 'C' standard it's >trying to conform to - ref e.g.: >* >https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html[https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html] >(& sub-ref: >https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Standards.html#Standards[https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Standards.html#Standards]) >- see the top two items, '-ansi' & '-std='; & incl the examples they >give re '//'-style comments. --- >Basically, you may have some command-line switch &/or environment-var >that is reaching as far as the gcc cmdline, and causing the problem. I can find nothing in envs or in profile etc that would account for this. Have made the alteration in the file in question and am going forward on that basis at the moment. Incidently, Solid 5.25.0 is also failing at that stage and yet I know I compiled this several months ago without errors. thanks Cliff -- -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support[http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support] FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html[http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html] Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
