Debian Bug report logs - #765370
xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:13:53 -0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: src:xutils-dev
Version: 1:7.7+3
Tags: patch
User: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ppc64el

The attached patch adds the ppc64el pieces and fixes a FTBFS on sciplot
(and potentially others), avoiding to pass -mminimal-toc from CCOPTIONS
to LDOPTIONS (because it's incorrect for 'ld -m<value>').

May you please consider it for an upload?

Thanks!


Details:
--------

The fixed FTBFS error [1]:

	ld -shared  -o libsciplot.so.1.36 SciPlot.o SciPlotUtil.o 
-mminimal-toc       -lXm [...]      -soname libsciplot.so.1 -lc
	ld: unrecognised emulation mode: minimal-toc
	Supported emulations: elf64lppc elf32lppc elf32lppclinux elf32lppcsim 
elf32ppclinux elf32ppc elf32ppcsim elf64ppc
	make[2]: *** [shared] Error 1
	
[1] 
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=sciplot&arch=ppc64el&ver=1.36-16&stamp=1410447072

-- 
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
IBM Linux Technology Center

[xutils-dev-ppc64el.debdiff (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:45:11 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: tag -1 moreinfo

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:13:53 -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:

> Package: src:xutils-dev
> Version: 1:7.7+3
> Tags: patch
> User: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: ppc64el
> 
> The attached patch adds the ppc64el pieces and fixes a FTBFS on sciplot
> (and potentially others), avoiding to pass -mminimal-toc from CCOPTIONS
> to LDOPTIONS (because it's incorrect for 'ld -m<value>').
> 
> May you please consider it for an upload?
> 
The 'add ppc64el support' patch seems to make the other one unnecessary,
since -mminimal-toc is only added for ppc64architecture, which wouldn't
apply to ppc64el?  Am I missing something?

Also, have any of these patches been sent upstream?

Cheers,
Julien

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #17 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>, 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 11:56:31 -0300

Hi Julien,

On 10/15/2014 05:45 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> The 'add ppc64el support' patch seems to make the other one unnecessary,
> since -mminimal-toc is only added for ppc64architecture, which wouldn't
> apply to ppc64el?  Am I missing something?

It happens the patch doesn't disable the ppc64architecture, it just adds
the ppc64el architecture - so if you're in powerpc64 and little endian,
both are defined (see there's no #else in this piece):

	+ # ifdef __powerpc64__
	++#  ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN__
	++#    ifndef Ppc64elArchitecture
	++#      define Ppc64elArchitecture
	++#    endif
	++#  endif
	+ #  ifndef Ppc64Architecture
	+ #   define Ppc64Architecture
	+ #  endif

I haven't discussed the patch with its author. Do you believe this point
should be handled differently? (i.e., use an #else)

One thing I had in mind when writing the other patch was trying not to
modify existing stuff, so not to break what used it before, so maybe
that fits here too - ppc64el is also some sort of ppc64, except for
the endianness-dependent pieces.


> Also, have any of these patches been sent upstream?

I don't think so. I'd be happy to submit them (w/ the other author's
acknowledgement) if you/other maintainers are OK w/ them (as you're
more experienced - I only looked at a small piece for fixing it).

Thanks!

-- 
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
IBM Linux Technology Center

Message #22 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Cc: 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:17:47 +0200

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:56:31 -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:

> Hi Julien,
> 
> On 10/15/2014 05:45 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >The 'add ppc64el support' patch seems to make the other one unnecessary,
> >since -mminimal-toc is only added for ppc64architecture, which wouldn't
> >apply to ppc64el?  Am I missing something?
> 
> It happens the patch doesn't disable the ppc64architecture, it just adds
> the ppc64el architecture - so if you're in powerpc64 and little endian,
> both are defined (see there's no #else in this piece):
> 
Ah, right, I must have been blind...

> 	+ # ifdef __powerpc64__
> 	++#  ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN__
> 	++#    ifndef Ppc64elArchitecture
> 	++#      define Ppc64elArchitecture
> 	++#    endif
> 	++#  endif
> 	+ #  ifndef Ppc64Architecture
> 	+ #   define Ppc64Architecture
> 	+ #  endif
> 
> I haven't discussed the patch with its author. Do you believe this point
> should be handled differently? (i.e., use an #else)
> 
This way seems to be how mips is handled, so let's leave it as-is.

> One thing I had in mind when writing the other patch was trying not to
> modify existing stuff, so not to break what used it before, so maybe
> that fits here too - ppc64el is also some sort of ppc64, except for
> the endianness-dependent pieces.
> 
I wonder if the -mminimal-toc thing is actually needed on BE ppc64.  It
seems to have been introduced by
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303 but I don't know why.
So if we could just remove that, it seems like it'd be easier all
around.

Cheers,
Julien

Message #27 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

Cc: 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:50:21 -0300

On 10/15/2014 12:17 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:56:31 -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:
>> >It happens the patch doesn't disable the ppc64architecture, it just adds
>> >the ppc64el architecture - so if you're in powerpc64 and little endian,
>> >both are defined (see there's no #else in this piece):
>> >
> Ah, right, I must have been blind...
...
> This way seems to be how mips is handled, so let's leave it as-is.

Haha, no problem. Ok.

>> >One thing I had in mind when writing the other patch was trying not to
>> >modify existing stuff, so not to break what used it before, so maybe
>> >that fits here too - ppc64el is also some sort of ppc64, except for
>> >the endianness-dependent pieces.
>> >
> I wonder if the -mminimal-toc thing is actually needed on BE ppc64.  It
> seems to have been introduced by
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303  but I don't know why.

Well, I can't say of it in CCOPTIONS, because it's a valid CC option;
but in LDOPTIONS, it's certainly wrong (it's not an emulation mode).

BTW, I just noticed sciplot FTBFS on ppc64 too, for the same reason [1].

> So if we could just remove that, it seems like it'd be easier all
> around.

There are legitimate reasons one may want -mminimal-toc in CCOPTIONS
(I don't understand much of it, but have seen it elsewhere).

That said, I certainly wouldn't want to break its users/packages.
It would be enough to just remove it from LDOPTIONS for ppc64/el.

If you recommend to forward and discuss this upstream, perharps to
understand how this happened, I would be willing to help/ask.

If you have the time and a quick way to track to the point where
CCOPTIONS were added to LDOPTIONS it might help. I can try/learn
later, otherwise.

What you'd prefer?

Thanks for your time and attention.

[1] http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/package.php?p=sciplot&suite=sid

-- 
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
IBM Linux Technology Center

Message #32 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Fernando Seiti Furusato" <ferseiti@br.ibm.com>

To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

Cc: 765370@bugs.debian.org,"Breno Henrique Leitao" <brenohl@br.ibm.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 08:57:27 -0300

Hello, Julien.

I see that at least sciplot is failing to build due to the usage of 
Imake's
-mminimal-toc flag.
Are you planning to apply Mauricio's patch?

I ask because there might be possible to workaround on sciplot, if you
decide not to use the patch on this report.
In which case, I might send a patch to sciplot.

Thanks and regards.

Fernando

Message #37 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Fernando Seiti Furusato <ferseiti@br.ibm.com>

Cc: 765370@bugs.debian.org, Breno Henrique Leitao <brenohl@br.ibm.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 17:04:23 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Mon, Dec  7, 2015 at 08:57:27 -0300, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote:

> Hello, Julien.
> 
> I see that at least sciplot is failing to build due to the usage of 
> Imake's
> -mminimal-toc flag.
> Are you planning to apply Mauricio's patch?
> 
I think the patch should be sent/discussed upstream
(xorg-devel@lists.x.org) first.  The relevant repo is
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/util/cf/ and guidelines at
http://www.x.org/wiki/Development/Documentation/SubmittingPatches/

Thanks,
Julien

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #42 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fernando Seiti Furusato <ferseiti@br.ibm.com>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <765370@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 09:33:34 -0500

Source: xutils-dev
Followup-For: Bug #765370

Thank you for the info, Julien.
I actually submitted a bug report [1] and sent the patches there.
However, I am not sure it is the correct path to do so.

[1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93631

Cheers.

Fernando

Message #47 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Fernando Seiti Furusato <ferseiti@br.ibm.com>, 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:51:40 +0100

On Thu, Jan  7, 2016 at 09:33:34 -0500, Fernando Seiti Furusato wrote:

> Source: xutils-dev
> Followup-For: Bug #765370
> 
> Thank you for the info, Julien.
> I actually submitted a bug report [1] and sent the patches there.
> However, I am not sure it is the correct path to do so.
> 
> [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93631
> 
Yeah, I don't think anybody looks at that bugzilla much.  git send-email
to xorg-devel is the best path.

Thanks,
Julien

Message #54 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Fernando Seiti Furusato" <ferseiti@br.ibm.com>

To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

Cc: 765370@bugs.debian.org, "Breno Henrique Leitao" <brenohl@br.ibm.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#765370: xutils-dev: fix CCOPTIONS/LDOPTIONS causing FTBFS on sciplot on ppc64el [PATCH]

Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 08:45:14 -0300

Hi Julien.

I sent the patches through git send-email as you recommended.
Are you able to review them?
For some reason they didn't group within the same thread.

http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2016-January/048475.html
http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2016-January/048472.html
http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2016-January/048474.html

Thanks and regards.
Fernando

Message #59 received at 765370@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Frederic Bonnard <frediz@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

To: 765370@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Help needed for this patch

Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 18:19:42 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,
the patch didn't have much feedback on the mailing list upstream.
Julien could you help on this ?
For the time being would be possible to take the patches in the
packaging ?
sciplot is still failing.

F.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.