Hi,
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 21:17:41 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Hilmar_Preu=c3=9fe?=
wrote:
> We stopped provide a symbols files, instead we use shlibs now. Does that
> eventually solve your issue? Remove the tag patch for now.
Yes, I just synced 2.5.10+ds1-3 into Ubuntu, and I can confirm that it
builds
Control: tags -1 - patch
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
tags -1 - patch
Am 12.11.2018 um 03:12 teilte Jeremy Bicha mit:
Hi Jeremy,
> teckit fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el because the symbols don't
> match. A few symbols are added and several are missing.
>
> Notably, Ubuntu's ppc64el uses -O3 by default which occasionally leads
> to symbols
Hi Hilmar,
> https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu2.patch
My latest upload has fixed the build onppc64el, but it still fails on
armel armhf s390x.
Guess that is shlib files and drop all symbols. It is anyway only
texlive using it at the moment.
Norbert
--
PREINING
Hi Hilmar,
> lots about symbol files
I tend to drop the symbols file completely, it seems - adn this is
confirmed by others, that symbols files for c++ programs/libs are just
broken.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2020/07/msg00259.html
and use shlibs files instead.
> I changed the
Am 21.11.2018 um 10:49 teilte Matthias Klose mit:
Hi,
> Control: tags -1 + patch
>
> proposed patch at
> https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu1.patch
>
New URL:
https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu2.patch
H.
--
sigfault
#206401
Control: tags -1 + patch
proposed patch at
https://patches.ubuntu.com/t/teckit/teckit_2.5.8+ds2-5ubuntu1.patch
Hi guys,
I don't have the mental bandwidth to deal with this. Please feel free to
NMU with something that makes sense.
Regards,
Daniel
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:18 PM Matthias Klose wrote:
> the main question is: are these symbols part of the ABI? And I very much
> doubt
> that they are.
the main question is: are these symbols part of the ABI? And I very much doubt
that they are. symbols files for C++ are so yesterday. There are better tools
like abi-compliance-checker and abigail.
Patches accepted provided it doesn't break the Debian builds and doesn't
require manual maintenance as upstream will be releasing a new version by
the end of the year and the symbols file will help see if there are any API
or ABI changes.
Regards,
Daniel
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 7:28 PM Jeremy
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:45 AM Daniel Glassey wrote:
> Are you aware of any ways for the symbols file to handle different symbols on
> different distros? Do you know what any other packages with a symbols file do
> with this problem?
I think you could just mark all the symbols that don't
Hi,
Are you aware of any ways for the symbols file to handle different symbols
on different distros? Do you know what any other packages with a symbols
file do with this problem?
Or should there be a patch for Ubuntu rather than a change to the Debian
package if the ppc64el build there is going
Source: teckit
Version: 2.5.8+ds2-5
Severity: important
teckit fails to build on Ubuntu's ppc64el because the symbols don't
match. A few symbols are added and several are missing.
Notably, Ubuntu's ppc64el uses -O3 by default which occasionally leads
to symbols differences compared to all other
13 matches
Mail list logo
