On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 05:01:17PM +0100, Hazel Russman wrote:
> I have been trying to build this program for some time. It builds
> uneventfully in Crux on the same machine. However all my builds in LFS have
> failed in the same way. First comes a long string of warnings of the type:
>
> ../../dist/include/mozilla/mozalloc.h:207:33: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘MOZALLOC_THROW_BAD_ALLOC’
> void* operator new(size_t size) MOZALLOC_THROW_BAD_ALLOC
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Warning: -Wdeprecated in
> /sources/Pale-Moon-27.4.0_Release/firefox-build-dir/dist/include/mozilla/mozalloc.h:
> dynamic exception specifications are deprecated in C++11
> ../../dist/include/mozilla/mozalloc.h:201:52: warning: dynamic exception
> specifications are deprecated in C++11 [-Wdeprecated]
> #define MOZALLOC_THROW_BAD_ALLOC_IF_HAS_EXCEPTIONS
> throw(std::bad_alloc)
>
I treat warnings like that as a side issue, and hope somebody will
care enough to fix them somewhen : there are hundreds, or maybe
thousands, in my normal builds - the last one that affected me was
in one of the perl modules: something had been deprecated for a
while, then in 5.26 it got removed. Fortunately, somebody using
debian unstable had noticed the deprecation when they recently moved
to 5.24 - and provided a fix.
> Then, in the BatteryManager component, come the actual errors:
>
> In file included from ../../dist/stl_wrappers/new:44:0,
> from /usr/include/c++/7.2.0/bits/exception_ptr.h:40,
> from /usr/include/c++/7.2.0/exception:142,
> from ../../dist/system_wrappers/exception:3,
> from /usr/include/c++/7.2.0/new:40,
> from ../../dist/system_wrappers/new:3,
> from ../../dist/stl_wrappers/limits:38,
> from
> /sources/Pale-moon-27.4.0_Release/dom/battery/BatteryManager.cpp:6:
> ../../dist/include/mozilla/mozalloc.h:207:33: error: ‘bad_alloc’ in namespace
> ‘std’ does not name a type
> void* operator new(size_t size) MOZALLOC_THROW_BAD_ALLOC
> ^
That is definitely what happens when the compiler uses a newer c++
standard.
>
> In Crux, using gcc 6.4, there are neither warnings nor errors, which suggests
> that in LFS, the same problem is giving rise to both.
>
I'm surprised - I looked at Pale Moon a month or two ago (probably
gcc-7.1) and got lots of errors (building with -j4 or -j8). I
looked at upstream and saw they preferred a gcc-4 version to gcc-5.
Other reports I found suggested it wouldn't build with gcc-6, so I
gave up on it.
> I have tried using in LFS the identical source code and mozconfig that the
> Crux package uses, and I get the same errors. As you can see, the header
> referred to in the messages is internal and not a system header, so the
> difference has nothing to do with the overall environment.
>
> Is it possible that simply using a later version of gcc can cause such a
> difference in the outcome?
Very much. With firefox we've had a lot of different workarounds in
the last year or two, all because of newer gcc versions. In
particular, the c++ standard that g++ defaults to moves on.
Some of those workarounds were for miscompilation, so not relevant
here, others were because the C++ standard had changed.
I think at one time we tried --std= in the CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS, but I
forget which standard seemed to help. At other times, inserting
extra headers has been necessary.
At the moment I'm resigned to using firefox, despite their
continuing efforts to make building harder. If you or anybody else
manages to build Pale Moon with current LFS, and it turns out to be
useful (there was also a comment that its javascript was out of date),
a hint would be welcome. But my impression is that trying to build
Pale Moon with current g++ is only for those who are have the time
to try different fixes, and who feel lucky.
Unlike firefox and seamonkey, its builders were mostly using old
systems when I looked, hence my surprise that crux managed to build
it on gcc-6.4. Maybe check if they force something in their CFLAGS
or CXXFLAGS.
ĸen
--
Truth, in front of her huge walk-in wardrobe, selected black leather
boots with stiletto heels for such a barefaced truth.
- Unseen Academicals
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
