Hi,

I fixed most of the issues below. I think I'm at the point that I need
other people to also look at it.

@Gordan, if you could sync please?

The one (two?) open issue is that X stops working when updating either
pixman or xorg-x11-server-Xorg.

This is probably similar to what we've seen earlier, but I still don't
know what causes this, or how to resolve.

Just remembered, another open issue is that libreoffice won't build any
more. apparently it now needs a newer gcc or at least a newer
linux-atomic to build successfully.
not sure how that is incorporated easiest in the quite complex building
setup of libreoffice.

Jacco




On 05/20/16 13:56, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here an update of the progress of building RSEL6.8
> In total there were 308 updated SRPMs and 15 new. Of those 323 I've
> got now 218 builded without change and 33 with patches.
> The remaining 72 SRPMs break down as follows:
>
>   * 62 missing deps (these depend on the issues below)
>   * 4 'known' build errors (an older version build, but the latest not)
>   * 6 new build errors
>
>
> On top of this, I now finally got java-1.8.0 to build, but alas not
> the latest version.
>
> The packages with new errors are:
>
>   * certmonger (the tests fail, apparently a known issue, I saw a hint
>     that CentOS also had an issue here. I need to look at how they
>     fixed this)
>   * evince (libtool issue, see below)
>   * java-1.6.0-openjdk (the latest security patch breaks the arm32
>     JIT, not sure how to build without. java-1.8.0-openjdk has a
>     similar issue)
>   * junit4 (java6 Zero VM crashes during build, I've see this before.
>     I'll try if it builds with an older java6.)
>   * mesa-private-llvm (see below)
>   * openssl (tests fail because certificates in the SRPM are now
>     expired, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1335097)
>
>
> There are two issues I like to expand on as I don not yet know how to
> properly solve: evince and mesa-private-llvm.
>
> _evince_
> evince breaks with the following error:
> g++: /usr/lib/gcc/armv5tel-redhat-linux-gnueabi/4.4.5/../../../crti.o:
> No such file or directory
> g++: /usr/lib/gcc/armv5tel-redhat-linux-gnueabi/4.4.5/crtbeginS.o: No
> such file or directory
> g++: /usr/lib/gcc/armv5tel-redhat-linux-gnueabi/4.4.5/crtendS.o: No
> such file or directory
> g++: /usr/lib/gcc/armv5tel-redhat-linux-gnueabi/4.4.5/../../../crtn.o:
> No such file or directory
>
> On inspection there is no directory 4.4.5, there is one called 4.4.4
> and one link named 4.4.7 to the 4.4.4
> $ ll /usr/lib/gcc/armv5tel-redhat-linux-gnueabi
> total 4
> drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Feb  5 01:28 4.4.4
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    5 Feb  5 01:28 4.4.7 -> 4.4.4
>
> The 4.4.5 is something that is hardcoded in /usr/bin/libtool, but does
> not exist any more. I guess that libtool was build when we had a gcc
> version 4.4.5, while it should have been build with a gcc version 4.4.4
>
> possible solutions:
>
>   * add a link in the buildroot when building evince and be done with it.
>   * rebuild libtool with a minor version increase, so that it will
>     have a hardcoded reference to 4.4.7
>   * patch libtool to have a hardcoded link to 4.4.4
>   * probably more ...
>
> Any ideas on the 'correct' fix?
>
>
> _mesa-private-llvm_
> This is the most important issue, as mesa depends on this and most of
> the other missing dependencies are on mesa.
>
> mesa-private-llvm breaks with the following error:
> /usr/bin/ld:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/llvm-3.6.2.src/Release/lib/libLLVM-3.6-mesa.so:
> hidden symbol `_ZNSt13__future_base11_State_base15_M_run_deferredEv'
> isn't defined
> /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> (as background, mesa and mesa-private-llvm need a newer gcc to build,
> therefore the SRPM also contains the source of that newer gcc)
>
> I have been searching for the mentioned symbol and found that it *is*
> present in libstdc++_nonshared.a of the new gcc, but if I conduct the
> same search on a Centos6.7+CR machine, the symbol is also found in
> libstdc++.a
>
> I have not found yet why there are differences of those symbols
> between armv5 and x86_64.
>
> Any help and/or ideas on how to fix appreciated, I'm a bit lost here.
>
> Jacco
>
> PS, @gordan, all the intermediate work is at the usual place.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to