Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
- Original Message - On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:52:50PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: [...] It is the Debian source package that fails, exclusively. [...] That hunk shows why it is failing - no ppc64le:Linux match in the old script. Nathan is already looking into it... So, yeah, its definitely got something to do with the local setup here inserting configure-generated files that are dated. I build the .debs from a tagged git repo checkout (without the generated files initially) so they do get inserted locally. Having re-installed all autoconf-related packages now on that machine, as well as constructing an entirely new unstable VM for builds :P ... the problem has resolved itself and I see config.sub with ppc64le bits too. I'll do a build and upload (source-unchanged) 3.2.4-1 package to make sure its resolved on the build servers. Thanks to all for looking into it so closely! cheers. -- Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:00:02AM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: On 08/04/2015 07:58 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: That makes distclean do the same thing that realclean does and, as that commit I pointed out previously, has been intentionally separated in the build system. You could make the debian/rules file simply call 'make realclean' rather than 'make distclean' to acheive this without changing the main makefile. Either way, however, I don't think that's the problem. Yes, except I tried changing debian/rules to use realclean before coming up with that idea and it broke the build. make[1]: Entering directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' ./configure $LOCAL_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS configure: error: cannot find install-sh, install.sh, or shtool in . ./. Makefile:89: recipe for target 'include/builddefs' failed make[1]: *** [include/builddefs] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' debian/rules:36: recipe for target '.census' failed make: *** [.census] Error 2 make realclean also removes the .census file, so it appears that the debian package build has a dependency on it. Still, that's a side issue, because we still don't exactly what is causing the configure script to fail. Darrick Wong noted on #xfs that his builds of xfsprogs on ppc64el from a tarball don't fail at all. His libtool chain is: When I build xfsprog on ppc64el from a tarball, it does not fail at all either. But in my case, specifically, it is because the tarball does not come with a configure file (which would solve the problem I pointed out), so Makefile generates it and runs libtoolize -c -i which updates the configuration files needed. You seem to be talking about 2 different tarballs here. The tarballs I release most definitely have a configure script in them: $ tar tfv xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1.tar.gz |grep configure -rw-r--r-- dave/dave 3098 2015-08-04 11:16 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure.ac -rwxr-xr-x dave/dave469084 2015-08-04 14:25 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure So I don't know where you are getting xfsprogs tarballs without configure scripts from. To clear up any confusion, can you please explain exactly what you are building (step by step for the dummies in the audience like me) so we all understand exactly what context the build is failing in? host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu libtoolize: (GNU libtool) 2.4.2 Debian-2.4.2-1.7ubuntu1 automake: automake (GNU automake) 1.14.1 autoconf: autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69 Which is similar to mine, but libtoolize is slightly older (and I'm on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu). It turns out that the reason the build works on his machines is that someone had made a small manual change to /usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4: --- a/libtool.m4 2014-02-11 04:58:49.0 -0800 +++ b/libtool.m4 2015-07-31 13:48:23.375432372 -0700 @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ rm -rf conftest* ;; -x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ +x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|ppc*-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ s390*-*linux*|s390*-*tpf*|sparc*-*linux*) # Find out which ABI we are using. echo 'int i;' conftest.$ac_ext i.e. the problem looks to be that the libtool package shipped in debian/unstable does not support ppc64el correctly Actually powerpc*-*linux* covers the triplet for ppc64el, as seen in: host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu So ppc*-*linux* does not make difference for ppc64el, if that is what you refer to. Did you actually try it? Sure, it may not be the reason that it builds correctly on Darrick's machine, but the fact is that Darricks' environment successfully builds packages from the official xfsprogs tarballs without problems and yours doesn't. The above change is the only thing that is non-standard in Darrick's environment, so it's an obvious change to try even if it makes no sense to you. And it still doesn't change the situation: we can't fix the problem until we understand what is causing it Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
Hi Dave! On 08/05/2015 10:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote: make realclean also removes the .census file, so it appears that the debian package build has a dependency on it. Still, that's a side issue, because we still don't exactly what is causing the configure script to fail. Right. The immediate reason is because config.guess and config.sub are not being updated. Once they are updated, configure will not fail. When I copy them, manually, from /usr/share/libtool/config/, the build does not fail. You seem to be talking about 2 different tarballs here. The tarballs I release most definitely have a configure script in them: $ tar tfv xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1.tar.gz |grep configure -rw-r--r-- dave/dave 3098 2015-08-04 11:16 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure.ac -rwxr-xr-x dave/dave469084 2015-08-04 14:25 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure So I don't know where you are getting xfsprogs tarballs without configure scripts from. My apologies, it was a confusion of my part. I was looking at the git tree. The tarball does come with configure. But the config.{guess,sub} that come with it are up-to-date, differently of what comes with the debian src package. I generated a diff from them, which is attached. Also, the version I have here is not 4.2.0-rc1, it is the one found at the git repository I mentioned. Is that not correct? To clear up any confusion, can you please explain exactly what you are building (step by step for the dummies in the audience like me) so we all understand exactly what context the build is failing in? Ok. Just clarifying that what actually fails is the debian package, exclusively. The ones found in xfs.org (actually oss.sgi.com/xfs) build flawlessly. Originally I used sbuild, but manually this is what I do: # apt-get source xfsprogs # cd xfsprogs-3.2.4/ # apt-get build-dep xfsprogs ... # dpkg-buildpackage I am attaching the build log because it is a bit long. Actually powerpc*-*linux* covers the triplet for ppc64el, as seen in: host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu So ppc*-*linux* does not make difference for ppc64el, if that is what you refer to. Did you actually try it? Yes, I changed that line 1315 in /usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4 to look the same as you showed, but the build failed anyway. Sure, it may not be the reason that it builds correctly on Darrick's machine, but the fact is that Darricks' environment successfully builds packages from the official xfsprogs tarballs without problems and yours doesn't. The above change is the only thing that is non-standard in Darrick's environment, so it's an obvious change to try even if it makes no sense to you. I understand that. A correction though: mine builds from the official xfsprogs source or tarballs without problems too. It is the Debian source package that fails, exclusively. And it still doesn't change the situation: we can't fix the problem until we understand what is causing it What is causing it is: the old files config.guess and config.sub in the source package. Whether shipping updated ones or not shipping the configure file would be the quick solution to this. Again, it is an exclusive problem with the Debian package. I am curious about something I have just noticed (while writing this e-mail). Running apt-get source xfsprogs gets a tarball xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz Shouldn't it be the exact same file I get from: http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/pool/main/x/xfsprogs/xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz Because they differ. And the latter does not fail at all. I am sorry for any confusion I might be causing :) Thanks and regards. -- Fernando Seiti Furusato IBM Linux Technology Center dpkg-buildpackage: source package xfsprogs dpkg-buildpackage: source version 3.2.4 dpkg-buildpackage: source distribution unstable dpkg-buildpackage: source changed by Nathan Scott nath...@debian.org dpkg-source --before-build xfsprogs-3.2.4 dpkg-buildpackage: host architecture ppc64el debian/rules clean == dpkg-buildpackage: clean test -f debian/rules rm -f built .census mkfs/mkfs.xfs-xfsprogs-udeb /usr/bin/make distclean make[1]: Entering directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' rm -rf debian/xfsprogs debian/xfslibs-dev debian/xfsprogs-udeb rm -f debian/*substvars debian/files* debian/*.debhelper dh_autoreconf_clean dh_clean rm -f debian/xfsprogs.substvars rm -f debian/xfsprogs.*.debhelper rm -rf debian/xfsprogs/ rm -f debian/xfslibs-dev.substvars rm -f debian/xfslibs-dev.*.debhelper rm -rf debian/xfslibs-dev/ rm -f debian/xfsprogs-udeb.substvars rm -f debian/xfsprogs-udeb.*.debhelper rm -rf debian/xfsprogs-udeb/ rm -f debian/*.debhelper.log rm -f debian/files find . \( \( \ \( -path .\*/.git -o -path .\*/.svn -o -path .\*/.bzr -o -path .\*/.hg -o -path .\*/CVS \) -prune -o -type f -a \ \( -name '#*#' -o -name '.*~' -o -name '*~' -o -name DEADJOE \ -o -name '*.orig' -o -name '*.rej' -o -name '*.bak' \ -o -name '.*.orig' -o -name
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On 08/04/2015 07:58 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: That makes distclean do the same thing that realclean does and, as that commit I pointed out previously, has been intentionally separated in the build system. You could make the debian/rules file simply call 'make realclean' rather than 'make distclean' to acheive this without changing the main makefile. Either way, however, I don't think that's the problem. Yes, except I tried changing debian/rules to use realclean before coming up with that idea and it broke the build. make[1]: Entering directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' ./configure $LOCAL_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS configure: error: cannot find install-sh, install.sh, or shtool in . ./. Makefile:89: recipe for target 'include/builddefs' failed make[1]: *** [include/builddefs] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' debian/rules:36: recipe for target '.census' failed make: *** [.census] Error 2 Darrick Wong noted on #xfs that his builds of xfsprogs on ppc64el from a tarball don't fail at all. His libtool chain is: When I build xfsprog on ppc64el from a tarball, it does not fail at all either. But in my case, specifically, it is because the tarball does not come with a configure file (which would solve the problem I pointed out), so Makefile generates it and runs libtoolize -c -i which updates the configuration files needed. host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu libtoolize: (GNU libtool) 2.4.2 Debian-2.4.2-1.7ubuntu1 automake: automake (GNU automake) 1.14.1 autoconf: autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69 Which is similar to mine, but libtoolize is slightly older (and I'm on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu). It turns out that the reason the build works on his machines is that someone had made a small manual change to /usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4: --- a/libtool.m4 2014-02-11 04:58:49.0 -0800 +++ b/libtool.m4 2015-07-31 13:48:23.375432372 -0700 @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ rm -rf conftest* ;; -x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ +x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|ppc*-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ s390*-*linux*|s390*-*tpf*|sparc*-*linux*) # Find out which ABI we are using. echo 'int i;' conftest.$ac_ext i.e. the problem looks to be that the libtool package shipped in debian/unstable does not support ppc64el correctly Actually powerpc*-*linux* covers the triplet for ppc64el, as seen in: host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu So ppc*-*linux* does not make difference for ppc64el, if that is what you refer to. IMHO, if the debian src package xfsprogs came just like it comes in git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsprogs, ie clean, the build would not fail. Thanks and regards. -- Fernando Seiti Furusato IBM Linux Technology Center -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:52:50PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: Hi Dave! On 08/05/2015 10:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote: make realclean also removes the .census file, so it appears that the debian package build has a dependency on it. Still, that's a side issue, because we still don't exactly what is causing the configure script to fail. Right. The immediate reason is because config.guess and config.sub are not being updated. Once they are updated, configure will not fail. When I copy them, manually, from /usr/share/libtool/config/, the build does not fail. You seem to be talking about 2 different tarballs here. The tarballs I release most definitely have a configure script in them: $ tar tfv xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1.tar.gz |grep configure -rw-r--r-- dave/dave 3098 2015-08-04 11:16 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure.ac -rwxr-xr-x dave/dave469084 2015-08-04 14:25 xfsprogs-4.2.0-rc1/configure So I don't know where you are getting xfsprogs tarballs without configure scripts from. My apologies, it was a confusion of my part. I was looking at the git tree. The tarball does come with configure. But the config.{guess,sub} that come with it are up-to-date, differently of what comes with the debian src package. I generated a diff from them, which is attached. Also, the version I have here is not 4.2.0-rc1, it is the one found at the git repository I mentioned. Is that not correct? I released 4.2.0-rc1 to the dev tree on kernel.org. I didn't update the tree on oss.sgi.com or make an official release tarball because it's a developer pre-release. And there's a couple of things under discussion that that might require a rebase of the tree, so that's another reason for not making an official release. A correction though: mine builds from the official xfsprogs source or tarballs without problems too. It is the Debian source package that fails, exclusively. Ok, that clears up the confusion. Thanks for explaining what is happening to the dummy in the audience (me). I am curious about something I have just noticed (while writing this e-mail). Running apt-get source xfsprogs gets a tarball xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz Shouldn't it be the exact same file I get from: http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/pool/main/x/xfsprogs/xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz Because they differ. And the latter does not fail at all. No idea - that's definitely a distro issue ;) make[1]: Entering directory '/home/xfsprogs/xfsprogs-3.2.4' ./configure $LOCAL_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS checking build system type... ./config.guess: unable to guess system type This script, last modified 2012-02-10, has failed to recognize This is what I found about an hour before reading this email. On #xfs: [06/08/15 09:32] dchinner_ now that last modified $timestamp is important [06/08/15 09:33] dchinner_ because that tells us what version was used to generate the script [06/08/15 09:34] dchinner_ in the version shipped in the 3.2.4 tarball, it is: [06/08/15 09:34] dchinner_ timestamp='2014-03-23' [06/08/15 09:34] dchinner_ and it clearly has entries for ppc64le in it ppc64:Linux:*:*) - echo powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu + echo powerpc64-unknown-linux-${LIBC} exit ;; ppc:Linux:*:*) - echo powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu + echo powerpc-unknown-linux-${LIBC} + exit ;; +ppc64le:Linux:*:*) + echo powerpc64le-unknown-linux-${LIBC} + exit ;; +ppcle:Linux:*:*) + echo powerpcle-unknown-linux-${LIBC} exit ;; That hunk shows why it is failing - no ppc64le:Linux match in the old script. Nathan is already looking into it... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
Hi Dave. I have just noticed that for config.guess and config.sub to be updated, no autoreconf or dh_autotools-dev is needed, because of how Makefile was made. In Makefile, @row 80: LIBTOOLIZE_INSTALL = `libtoolize -n -i /dev/null 2/dev/null echo -i` configure: libtoolize -c $(LIBTOOLIZE_INSTALL) -f cp include/install-sh . aclocal -I m4 autoconf This runs libtoolize -c -i which updates those files. The file debian/rules runs `make default`, which at some point calls the target above (`make configure`). But the file configure already exists, so it does not run. Curiously, running `dpkg-buildpackage` twice, causes configure file to be deleted, and the build completes without errors. So, answering to your question: Nowdays, the generated files in the 3.2.4 tarball created via a 'make dist' rule. I run that on an up to date debian unstable box with autoconfig 2.69 installed to generate the files, so the question I have is this: why is an up-to-date build box generating out of date configure/m4 scripts? What, exactly, is out of date, and how do I ensure that the pre-build config files are correctly up-to-date? The configure file comes shipped with the debian package, so that specific file is not re-generated and is always out of date. By the looks of the Makefile, there is no need to include autoreconf or autotools-dev in debian/rules, but to force `make distclean` to `rm configure`. Attached is a patch that summarizes that, but for some reason it does not work when running with parallel jobs enabled. But you can get the idea :) Regards. -- Fernando Seiti Furusato IBM Linux Technology Center diff -Nru xfsprogs-3.2.4/debian/changelog xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/debian/changelog --- xfsprogs-3.2.4/debian/changelog 2015-07-30 03:45:12.0 -0400 +++ xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/debian/changelog 2015-08-04 11:07:37.0 -0400 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +xfsprogs (3.2.4ppc64el1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium + + * debian/rules: removed usage of dh_autoreconf since it is not necessary. + * Makefile: change distclean target to remove configure every time. + + -- Fernando Seiti Furusato ferse...@br.ibm.com Tue, 04 Aug 2015 11:07:01 -0400 + xfsprogs (3.2.4) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release diff -Nru xfsprogs-3.2.4/debian/rules xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/debian/rules --- xfsprogs-3.2.4/debian/rules 2014-11-09 19:51:18.0 -0500 +++ xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/debian/rules 2015-08-04 11:06:56.0 -0400 @@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ .census: @echo == dpkg-buildpackage: configure 12 $(checkdir) - AUTOHEADER=/bin/true dh_autoreconf $(options) $(MAKE) include/platform_defs.h touch .census @@ -58,7 +57,6 @@ $(MAKE) distclean -rm -rf $(dirme) $(dirdev) $(dirdi) -rm -f debian/*substvars debian/files* debian/*.debhelper - dh_autoreconf_clean dh_clean binary-indep: diff -Nru xfsprogs-3.2.4/Makefile xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/Makefile --- xfsprogs-3.2.4/Makefile 2013-10-10 17:07:16.0 -0400 +++ xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/Makefile 2015-08-04 11:06:40.0 -0400 @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ $(Q)$(MAKE) $(MAKEOPTS) -C $* install-qa distclean: clean - $(Q)rm -f $(LDIRT) + $(Q)rm -f $(LDIRT) $(CONFIGURE) realclean: distclean $(Q)rm -f $(CONFIGURE) .gitcensus
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 12:24:06PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: Hi Dave. I have just noticed that for config.guess and config.sub to be updated, no autoreconf or dh_autotools-dev is needed, because of how Makefile was made. In Makefile, @row 80: LIBTOOLIZE_INSTALL = `libtoolize -n -i /dev/null 2/dev/null echo -i` configure: libtoolize -c $(LIBTOOLIZE_INSTALL) -f cp include/install-sh . aclocal -I m4 autoconf This runs libtoolize -c -i which updates those files. The file debian/rules runs `make default`, which at some point calls the target above (`make configure`). But the file configure already exists, so it does not run. Right. Intentionally so. diff -Nru xfsprogs-3.2.4/Makefile xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/Makefile --- xfsprogs-3.2.4/Makefile 2013-10-10 17:07:16.0 -0400 +++ xfsprogs-3.2.4ppc64el1/Makefile 2015-08-04 11:06:40.0 -0400 @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ $(Q)$(MAKE) $(MAKEOPTS) -C $* install-qa distclean: clean - $(Q)rm -f $(LDIRT) + $(Q)rm -f $(LDIRT) $(CONFIGURE) realclean: distclean $(Q)rm -f $(CONFIGURE) .gitcensus That makes distclean do the same thing that realclean does and, as that commit I pointed out previously, has been intentionally separated in the build system. You could make the debian/rules file simply call 'make realclean' rather than 'make distclean' to acheive this without changing the main makefile. Either way, however, I don't think that's the problem. Darrick Wong noted on #xfs that his builds of xfsprogs on ppc64el from a tarball don't fail at all. His libtool chain is: host-triplet: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu libtoolize: (GNU libtool) 2.4.2 Debian-2.4.2-1.7ubuntu1 automake: automake (GNU automake) 1.14.1 autoconf: autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.69 Which is similar to mine, but libtoolize is slightly older (and I'm on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu). It turns out that the reason the build works on his machines is that someone had made a small manual change to /usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4: --- a/libtool.m4 2014-02-11 04:58:49.0 -0800 +++ b/libtool.m4 2015-07-31 13:48:23.375432372 -0700 @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ rm -rf conftest* ;; -x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ +x86_64-*kfreebsd*-gnu|x86_64-*linux*|ppc*-*linux*|powerpc*-*linux*| \ s390*-*linux*|s390*-*tpf*|sparc*-*linux*) # Find out which ABI we are using. echo 'int i;' conftest.$ac_ext i.e. the problem looks to be that the libtool package shipped in debian/unstable does not support ppc64el correctly Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
Am 02.08.2015 um 00:52 schrieb Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com: On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 06:57:35PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: That error is common when configure is generated using out-of-date config.guess and config.sub. The ones that come with the package are, in fact, old. config.sub and config.guess are generated by the build, we don't ship them directly from the git repository. Perhaps you are building from a release tarball rather than from a clean git repository working area? Can you confirm this is the case? Just some observations from my side: Extracting the released tarball over a clean xfsprogs git repo and removing the .gitignore file, then git status reveals: Untracked files: (use git add file... to include in what will be committed) .gitcensus aclocal.m4 config.guess config.sub configure install-sh ltmain.sh m4/libtool.m4 m4/ltoptions.m4 m4/ltsugar.m4 m4/ltversion.m4 m4/lt~obsolete.m4 po/xfsprogs.pot Looks like there are a lot of untracked file. Is this intentional, to have potentially auto-generated but un-versioned files in a release tarball? It gets even more interesting, comparing debian source vs official release: http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xfsprogs/xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xfsprogs/xfsprogs_3.2.4.tar.gz ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/cmd_tars/xfsprogs-3.2.4.tar.gz ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/cmd_tars/xfsprogs-3.2.4.tar.gz There are differences in the following files: modified: aclocal.m4 modified: config.guess modified: config.sub modified: configure modified: ltmain.sh modified: m4/libtool.m4 modified: po/xfsprogs.pot So, imho the debian source tarball also doesn’t look clean, neither against the release tarball nor against a clean git checkout. Just my 2 cents, maybe that helps someone to solve this. Cheers, Daniel If so, can you remove the configure, config.sub and config.guess files and see if you get the same problem? This package used to run dh_autotools-dev_updateconfig and dh_autotools-dev_restoreconfig, which worked because it only updates those files. They were replaced by dh_autoreconf and dh_autoreconf_clean, which should update them, but does not run flawlessly. I think something is wrong with the m4 macros but I am not sure what. There are errors when running dh_autoreconf alone. # dh_autoreconf libtoolize: putting auxiliary files in AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, `.'. libtoolize: copying file `./ltmain.sh' libtoolize: putting macros in AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, `m4'. libtoolize: copying file `m4/libtool.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltoptions.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltsugar.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltversion.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/lt~obsolete.m4' libtoolize: Consider adding `-I m4' to ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS in Makefile.am. autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE_UMODE_T autoheader: Use AC_DEFINE([HAVE_UMODE_T], [], [Description]) autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSINT_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSUNSIGNED_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___U32 autoreconf: /usr/bin/autoheader failed with exit status: 1 dh_autoreconf: autoreconf -f -i returned exit code 1 I will keep working on it, but all I will be able to do if I get to a conclusion is send a patch here. Thus it will have to be dealt with by the maintainers anyway. The XFS list is cc'd on the bug, so the upstream maintainers are watching and will see the patch when you post it. ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com ___ xfs mailing list x...@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 03:06:50PM +0200, Daniel Bast wrote: Am 02.08.2015 um 00:52 schrieb Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com: On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 06:57:35PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: That error is common when configure is generated using out-of-date config.guess and config.sub. The ones that come with the package are, in fact, old. config.sub and config.guess are generated by the build, we don't ship them directly from the git repository. Perhaps you are building from a release tarball rather than from a clean git repository working area? Can you confirm this is the case? Just some observations from my side: Extracting the released tarball over a clean xfsprogs git repo and removing the .gitignore file, then git status reveals: Untracked files: (use git add file... to include in what will be committed) .gitcensus aclocal.m4 config.guess config.sub configure install-sh ltmain.sh m4/libtool.m4 m4/ltoptions.m4 m4/ltsugar.m4 m4/ltversion.m4 m4/lt~obsolete.m4 po/xfsprogs.pot Looks like there are a lot of untracked file. Is this intentional, to have potentially auto-generated but un-versioned files in a release tarball? Goes back to 2009: commit 1eb10ccb85261931d5401adbff11acd2dbc5bf63 Author: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de Date: Wed Apr 29 15:32:28 2009 +0200 keep autoconf-generated files over make distclean We do want to ship the autoconf-generated files over make distclean and pick them up in Makepkgs so that a user compiling the program doesn't require autoconf. For that split up make distclean from make realclean and exclude the files we want to keep form the former. To make this easier to maintain adher to stricter rules of use for CONFIGURE and LDIRT. CONFIGURE now includes all generated files from autoconf (or for it like our copied install-sh) and gets only removed on make realclean, but added to LSRCFILES so that Makepkgs can pick it up. Everything else than needs to be removed on a realclean gets assigned to LDIRT. Also split up the configure rule into one to generate the configure script and one to run it. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de Reviewed-by: Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org So we've been doing this with release tarballs for more than 6 years - I checked and found these files in the tarballs back to 3.0.1. The above commit is the last commit prior to the release of 3.0.1... Nowdays, the generated files in the 3.2.4 tarball created via a 'make dist' rule. I run that on an up to date debian unstable box with autoconfig 2.69 installed to generate the files, so the question I have is this: why is an up-to-date build box generating out of date configure/m4 scripts? What, exactly, is out of date, and how do I ensure that the pre-build config files are correctly up-to-date? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 06:57:35PM -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote: That error is common when configure is generated using out-of-date config.guess and config.sub. The ones that come with the package are, in fact, old. config.sub and config.guess are generated by the build, we don't ship them directly from the git repository. Perhaps you are building from a release tarball rather than from a clean git repository working area? Can you confirm this is the case? If so, can you remove the configure, config.sub and config.guess files and see if you get the same problem? This package used to run dh_autotools-dev_updateconfig and dh_autotools-dev_restoreconfig, which worked because it only updates those files. They were replaced by dh_autoreconf and dh_autoreconf_clean, which should update them, but does not run flawlessly. I think something is wrong with the m4 macros but I am not sure what. There are errors when running dh_autoreconf alone. # dh_autoreconf libtoolize: putting auxiliary files in AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, `.'. libtoolize: copying file `./ltmain.sh' libtoolize: putting macros in AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, `m4'. libtoolize: copying file `m4/libtool.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltoptions.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltsugar.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltversion.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/lt~obsolete.m4' libtoolize: Consider adding `-I m4' to ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS in Makefile.am. autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE_UMODE_T autoheader: Use AC_DEFINE([HAVE_UMODE_T], [], [Description]) autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSINT_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSUNSIGNED_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___U32 autoreconf: /usr/bin/autoheader failed with exit status: 1 dh_autoreconf: autoreconf -f -i returned exit code 1 I will keep working on it, but all I will be able to do if I get to a conclusion is send a patch here. Thus it will have to be dealt with by the maintainers anyway. The XFS list is cc'd on the bug, so the upstream maintainers are watching and will see the patch when you post it. ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
Hi, xfsprogs 3.2.4 fails to build on ppc64el, see log below or full build log https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=xfsprogsarch=ppc64elver=3.2.4stamp=1438318450 (xfsprogs 3.2.3 already failed with the same error) What is the reason for this, libtool to old? This potentially prevents the migration of the package to testing, which leaves CVE-2012-2150 open in testing on all arches. Cheers, Daniel == dpkg-buildpackage: configure test -f debian/rules AUTOHEADER=/bin/true dh_autoreconf find ! -ipath ./debian/* -a ! \( -path '*/.git/*' -o -path '*/.hg/*' -o -path '*/.bzr/*' -o -path '*/.svn/*' -o -path '*/CVS/*' \) -a -type f -exec md5sum {} \; debian/autoreconf.before autoreconf -f -i libtoolize: putting auxiliary files in AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, `.'. libtoolize: copying file `./ltmain.sh' libtoolize: putting macros in AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, `m4'. libtoolize: copying file `m4/libtool.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltoptions.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltsugar.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltversion.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/lt~obsolete.m4' libtoolize: Consider adding `-I m4' to ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS in Makefile.am. find ! -ipath ./debian/* -a ! \( -path '*/.git/*' -o -path '*/.hg/*' -o -path '*/.bzr/*' -o -path '*/.svn/*' -o -path '*/CVS/*' \) -a -type f -exec md5sum {} \; debian/autoreconf.after export DEBUG=-DNDEBUG DISTRIBUTION=debian INSTALL_USER=root INSTALL_GROUP=root LOCAL_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS=--enable-readline=yes --enable-blkid=yes ; /usr/bin/make include/platform_defs.h make[1]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' ./configure $LOCAL_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS ./config.guess: unable to guess system type This script, last modified 2012-02-10, has failed to recognize the operating system you are using. It is advised that you download the most up to date version of the config scripts from http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;a=blob_plain;f=config.guess;hb=HEAD and http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;a=blob_plain;f=config.sub;hb=HEAD If the version you run (./config.guess) is already up to date, please send the following data and any information you think might be pertinent to config-patc...@gnu.org in order to provide the needed information to handle your system. config.guess timestamp = 2012-02-10 uname -m = ppc64le uname -r = 3.16.0-4-powerpc64le uname -s = Linux uname -v = #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt11-1+deb8u2 (2015-07-17) /usr/bin/uname -p = /bin/uname -X = hostinfo = /bin/universe = /usr/bin/arch -k = /bin/arch = /usr/bin/oslevel = /usr/convex/getsysinfo = UNAME_MACHINE = ppc64le UNAME_RELEASE = 3.16.0-4-powerpc64le UNAME_SYSTEM = Linux UNAME_VERSION = #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt11-1+deb8u2 (2015-07-17) configure: error: cannot guess build type; you must specify one make[1]: *** [include/builddefs] Error 1 checking build system type... Makefile:89: recipe for target 'include/builddefs' failed make[1]: Leaving directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' make: *** [.census] Error 2 dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2 debian/rules:36: recipe for target '.census' failed
Bug#793495: xfsprogs fails to build on debian ppc64el
That error is common when configure is generated using out-of-date config.guess and config.sub. The ones that come with the package are, in fact, old. This package used to run dh_autotools-dev_updateconfig and dh_autotools-dev_restoreconfig, which worked because it only updates those files. They were replaced by dh_autoreconf and dh_autoreconf_clean, which should update them, but does not run flawlessly. I think something is wrong with the m4 macros but I am not sure what. There are errors when running dh_autoreconf alone. # dh_autoreconf libtoolize: putting auxiliary files in AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, `.'. libtoolize: copying file `./ltmain.sh' libtoolize: putting macros in AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, `m4'. libtoolize: copying file `m4/libtool.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltoptions.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltsugar.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltversion.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/lt~obsolete.m4' libtoolize: Consider adding `-I m4' to ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS in Makefile.am. autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE_UMODE_T autoheader: Use AC_DEFINE([HAVE_UMODE_T], [], [Description]) autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSINT_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___PSUNSIGNED_T autoheader: warning: missing template: HAVE___U32 autoreconf: /usr/bin/autoheader failed with exit status: 1 dh_autoreconf: autoreconf -f -i returned exit code 1 I will keep working on it, but all I will be able to do if I get to a conclusion is send a patch here. Thus it will have to be dealt with by the maintainers anyway. Regards. -- Fernando Seiti Furusato IBM Linux Technology Center -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org