Bug#701193: apr: FTBFS on x32: Needs update to ino_t_test
Source: apr Version: 1.4.6-3 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: debian-...@lists.debian.org Usertags: port-x32 ftbfs-x32 The apr source package is getting this build failure on the unofficial Debian x32 port: URL:http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=aprarch=x32ver=1.4.6-3stamp=1361525120: ... # Determine whether upstream's configure gives the same definition of apr_ino_t as we had until 1.2.11-1 rm -f debian/ino_t_test gcc -I/build/buildd-apr_1.4.6-3-x32-LxnUSw/apr-1.4.6/include -Ibuild-x32/include `build-x32/apr-1-config --cppflags` -o debian/ino_t_test debian/ino_t_test.c build-x32/apr-1-config: 42: cd: can't cd to /usr/share/apr-1.0/build/.. debian/ino_t_test *** *** 'apr_ino_t' size is 8, expected 4 *** Please report this to the Debian Apache maintainers *** make: *** [build-x32/config.status] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build-arch gave error exit status 2 The attached debdiff updates debian/ino_t_test.c to reflect the fact that ino_t is a 64-bit type on x32. With that patch, the package builds successfully and passes the testsuite. -- Daniel Schepler apr.debdiff Description: Binary data
Bug#701193: apr: FTBFS on x32: Needs update to ino_t_test
[Daniel Schepler] debian/ino_t_test *** *** 'apr_ino_t' size is 8, expected 4 *** Please report this to the Debian Apache maintainers *** This test exists in order to detect an ABI change from older 1.2 (before lenny!) to present. Obviously the x32 port didn't exist then, so, is there any installed base of x32 binaries outside Debian, built in an environment from 2007, that dynamically link to libapr1 and would break if run on Debian? Seems unlikely. Perhaps we can drop ino_t_test entirely? It seems like at this late date, any problem it still finds will be a false positive. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#701193: apr: FTBFS on x32: Needs update to ino_t_test
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Peter Samuelson pe...@p12n.org wrote: [Daniel Schepler] debian/ino_t_test *** *** 'apr_ino_t' size is 8, expected 4 *** Please report this to the Debian Apache maintainers *** This test exists in order to detect an ABI change from older 1.2 (before lenny!) to present. Obviously the x32 port didn't exist then, so, is there any installed base of x32 binaries outside Debian, built in an environment from 2007, that dynamically link to libapr1 and would break if run on Debian? Seems unlikely. Perhaps we can drop ino_t_test entirely? It seems like at this late date, any problem it still finds will be a false positive. That makes sense, and in fact I thought something like that might be the case when I was looking at it. But I chose to implement the least invasive change, and I'll leave it up to your judgment as to whether or not you want to remove it. -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
