Bug#709900: [Pkg-alsa-devel] Bug#709900: alsa-lib: FTBFS with binutils 2.23.2 from experimental: Undefined reference to symbol 'sin'
* Daniel Schepler dschep...@gmail.com [2013-05-27 18:49 -0700]: [...] OK, so binutils has been upgraded past 2.23.2-2 in experimental in the meantime. Hmm, 52 is greater than 2, isn't it? But testing with binutils 2.23.52.20130522-1, I can reproduce the same error. And according to Matthias Klose, this is an intentional behavior change in binutils upstream, Frim binutils NEWS file: Changes in 2.23: * Add support for the VLE extension to the PowerPC architecture. * Add support for x64 Windows target of the delayed-load-library. * Add support for the Renesas RL78 architecture. Changes in 2.22: Those changes are not that important. So maybe you have to double check your build environment. and it will eventually be uploaded to unstable once gcc-4.7 and gcc-4.8 updates have filtered through into testing. Which is why I upgraded to this binutils for build testing (along with gcc-defaults - gcc-4.8, make 3.82-1 from experimental, texinfo 5.1 from unstable which is stricter about error checking than past versions, etc.). Let's wait and see.. Elimar -- We all know Linux is great... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#709900: [Pkg-alsa-devel] Bug#709900: alsa-lib: FTBFS with binutils 2.23.2 from experimental: Undefined reference to symbol 'sin'
tags 709900 unreproducible severity 709900 minor thanks * Daniel Schepler dschep...@gmail.com [2013-05-26 08:16 -0700]: Source: alsa-lib Version: 1.0.27-4 Severity: important From my pbuilder build log, set up with binutils 2.23.2-2 installed: I can't find that version in amy Debian Repo? So it is not reproducible an an Debian environment. 2.23.2-2ubuntu1 is available in Ubuntu thus not relevant for us. # apt-cache policy binutils binutils: Installed: 2.22-8 Candidate: 2.22-8 Version table: 2.23.52.20130522-1 0 100 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main amd64 Packages *** 2.22-8 0 500 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages 990 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status All buildlogs [0] are ok as well as a testbuild in an unstable chroot, though [0] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=alsa-lib Elimar -- Excellent day for drinking heavily. Spike the office water cooler;-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#709900: [Pkg-alsa-devel] Bug#709900: alsa-lib: FTBFS with binutils 2.23.2 from experimental: Undefined reference to symbol 'sin'
On Monday, May 27, 2013 09:46:30 AM Elimar Riesebieter wrote: tags 709900 unreproducible severity 709900 minor thanks * Daniel Schepler dschep...@gmail.com [2013-05-26 08:16 -0700]: Source: alsa-lib Version: 1.0.27-4 Severity: important From my pbuilder build log, set up with binutils 2.23.2-2 installed: I can't find that version in amy Debian Repo? So it is not reproducible an an Debian environment. 2.23.2-2ubuntu1 is available in Ubuntu thus not relevant for us. # apt-cache policy binutils binutils: Installed: 2.22-8 Candidate: 2.22-8 Version table: 2.23.52.20130522-1 0 100 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main amd64 Packages *** 2.22-8 0 500 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages 990 ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status All buildlogs [0] are ok as well as a testbuild in an unstable chroot, though [0] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=alsa-lib Elimar OK, so binutils has been upgraded past 2.23.2-2 in experimental in the meantime. But testing with binutils 2.23.52.20130522-1, I can reproduce the same error. And according to Matthias Klose, this is an intentional behavior change in binutils upstream, and it will eventually be uploaded to unstable once gcc-4.7 and gcc-4.8 updates have filtered through into testing. Which is why I upgraded to this binutils for build testing (along with gcc-defaults - gcc-4.8, make 3.82-1 from experimental, texinfo 5.1 from unstable which is stricter about error checking than past versions, etc.). -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
