Hi,
two test rebuilds for vivid are almost finished on all architectures (pending powerpc and arm64). It's time to address the build failures seen with these test rebuilds. The most important ones are listed in [1] for the vivid archives. These really have to be addressed.
In preparation for the w-series (15.10), there was another test rebuild using GCC 5 (yes, GCC 5 will be the default for 15.10, without any possibility to fall back to older g++ and gfortran versions). Some outfall as usual [2]. I think the switch to GCC 5 will cause a bit more work than the switch to GCC 4.9 in utopic, so I would like to address as many issues as possible before the switch, even during the preparation of the 15.04 (vivid) release. Safe uploads to vivid would be appreciated. To check for buildability with GCC 5, add the ubuntu-toolchain-r/test PPA [3] to your apt sources. If you have time to kill, please fix these issues now. Make sure to forward fixes to the Debian bug tracker, bugs were filed for a Debian test rebuild as well [4]. Help for porting issues can be found in the GCC 5 porting notes [5] and an analysis of a test rebuild for another distro [6].
If you can't, or if you don't want to do an upload, please make sure to file a launchpad issue, and tag it with 'ftbfs' and probably 'patch', then the issue will show up in [1] and [2].
Help would be appreciated to fix issues in packages like boost so that we can get more reliable test rebuild results.
Thanks, Matthias
[1] http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-2015020... [2] http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-2015020... [3] https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-toolchain-r/+archive/ubuntu/test [4] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-5%3Busers=debian... [5] https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/porting_to.html [6] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-February/207549.html
Does GCC 5 do something to cause dpkg-gensymbols to break? For example, I was checking the list to see if anything I deal with directly was broken, and checked a few of the other failures for packages I depend on, to see what to expect. In doing so, I ran across the ubuntu-download-manager [1] failure. It seems to actually build just fine, but the dpkg-gensymbols check is failing. It seems to no longer export the operator() method on std::function definitions. For example:
- (c++)"std::function<void (Ubuntu::DownloadManager::Download*)>::operator()(Ubuntu::DownloadManager::Download*) const@Base" 0.4+14.10.20140618 +#MISSING: 0.9+15.04.20141202-0ubuntu1# (c++)"std::function<void (Ubuntu::DownloadManager::Download*)>::operator()(Ubuntu::DownloadManager::Download*) const@Base" 0.4+14.10.20140618
This is not mentioned in the porting guide that I can see though, and removing these from the .symbols file will break building on gcc 4.x. The porting guide only mentions converting std::nullptr_t to bool in C++ issues. What's the best way to deal with this if it comes up?
[1] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/198342635/buildlog_ubuntu-vivid-i386.ubuntu-d...
On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 00:12 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Hi,
two test rebuilds for vivid are almost finished on all architectures (pending powerpc and arm64). It's time to address the build failures seen with these test rebuilds. The most important ones are listed in [1] for the vivid archives. These really have to be addressed.
In preparation for the w-series (15.10), there was another test rebuild using GCC 5 (yes, GCC 5 will be the default for 15.10, without any possibility to fall back to older g++ and gfortran versions). Some outfall as usual [2]. I think the switch to GCC 5 will cause a bit more work than the switch to GCC 4.9 in utopic, so I would like to address as many issues as possible before the switch, even during the preparation of the 15.04 (vivid) release. Safe uploads to vivid would be appreciated. To check for buildability with GCC 5, add the ubuntu-toolchain-r/test PPA [3] to your apt sources. If you have time to kill, please fix these issues now. Make sure to forward fixes to the Debian bug tracker, bugs were filed for a Debian test rebuild as well [4]. Help for porting issues can be found in the GCC 5 porting notes [5] and an analysis of a test rebuild for another distro [6].
If you can't, or if you don't want to do an upload, please make sure to file a launchpad issue, and tag it with 'ftbfs' and probably 'patch', then the issue will show up in [1] and [2].
Help would be appreciated to fix issues in packages like boost so that we can get more reliable test rebuild results.
Thanks, Matthias
[1] http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-2015020... [2] http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-2015020... [3] https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-toolchain-r/+archive/ubuntu/test [4] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-5%3Busers=debian... [5] https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/porting_to.html [6] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-February/207549.html
-
Matthias Klose -
Rodney Dawes