On Friday 05 June 2009 11:13:06 Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 02:42:31AM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:32:34AM +0200, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Montag 01 Juni 2009 schrieb Martin Vidner:
Hi,
in case you wonder why your C++ package build started to fail with error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*'
It's because glibc-2.10 has been checked in which contains stricter prototypes for some functions. Instead of the C prototype char *strchr(const char *, int) we have char *strchr(char *, int) const char *strchr(const char *, int)
Details are at http://udrepper.livejournal.com/20948.html
Thanks Martin for the pointer. The fallout of this is pretty large so I'm asking anyone with a failure to fix packages - the change is done easily done and we need to get the current rate of failures down before we can integrate more things.
A lot of fixed packages are already waiting to be accepted, thanks for that. But I'm afraid a lot is left to do ;(
By the way, I just created a sr for another glibc update that might induce some build failures - in glibc-2.8, namespace pollution of many header files was fixed and many definitions are now guarded by USE_GNU etc.; at that time, this introduced too many build failures so we reverted this change for the time being, but by now, I think most applications should have been fixed.
If it fixes getline() it will get 17 more packages fixed:
Adding a getline prototype is actually a fix not a bug, see the link Martin posted. What worries me much more are the random crashes we see all around, I count 25 of those and they weren't there before the update. What worries me most is I could not reproduce them with osc build, but they are not bound to a specific build host - and according to bug 509398, valgrind "hides" them. So I'm wondering if we shouldn't back out of glibc 2.10 for the moment, then again this might be a small fallout you don't notice normally and only in Xen guests with n cpus - as in the build service, after all glibc 2.10 changed the malloc pools pretty drastically (according to drepper's words). Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org