[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#402825: marked as done (rootskel: FTBFS: undefined reference to `__FD_ZERO')



Your message dated Sat, 23 Dec 2006 19:47:05 +0000
with message-id <E1GyCpl-0004Sr-7A@ries.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#402746: fixed in rootskel 1.48
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---
Package: rootskel
Version: 1.47
Severity: serious

Hi,

Your package is failing to build on a few arches with the following
error:
make[3]: Entering directory `/build/buildd/rootskel-1.47/src-bootfloppy/bin'
klcc    -c -o cpio.o cpio.c
klcc    -c -o timeout_read.o timeout_read.c
klcc -shared -s -o cpio cpio.o
klcc -shared -s -o timeout_read timeout_read.o
timeout_read.o: In function `main':
timeout_read.c:(.text+0x7e): undefined reference to `__FD_ZERO'
timeout_read.c:(.text+0x8a): undefined reference to `__FD_SET'
make[3]: *** [timeout_read] Error 1

It seems that on amd64 those are defined as inline functions in
/usr/lib/klibc/include/asm-x86_64/posix_types.h but only when __KERNEL__
is set.


Kurt



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Source: rootskel
Source-Version: 1.48

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
rootskel, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

rootskel-bootfloppy_1.48_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/r/rootskel/rootskel-bootfloppy_1.48_i386.udeb
rootskel_1.48.dsc
  to pool/main/r/rootskel/rootskel_1.48.dsc
rootskel_1.48.tar.gz
  to pool/main/r/rootskel/rootskel_1.48.tar.gz
rootskel_1.48_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/r/rootskel/rootskel_1.48_i386.udeb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 402746@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Frans Pop <fjp@debian.org> (supplier of updated rootskel package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 20:34:42 +0100
Source: rootskel
Binary: rootskel-bootfloppy rootskel
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.48
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <debian-boot@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Frans Pop <fjp@debian.org>
Description: 
 rootskel   - Skeleton root filesystem used by debian-installer (udeb)
 rootskel-bootfloppy - Skeleton root filesystem used by debian-installer boot floppy (udeb)
Closes: 402746
Changes: 
 rootskel (1.48) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   [ Sylvain Ferriol ]
   * Klibc timeout does not work for all arches, so we reduce the usb keyboard
     support to i386. Closes: #402746.
   * Better root disk label test in bootfloppy init script.
   * Define KLIBC_SELECT C flag in timeout_read.c for i386.
Files: 
 7532c2ea4ef99caadfe77dd01f5bc9a2 870 debian-installer standard rootskel_1.48.dsc
 85311912cbced0352f3de4148ecf75a2 38145 debian-installer standard rootskel_1.48.tar.gz
 86160b377acd4182780d58037dbd6455 6204 debian-installer standard rootskel_1.48_i386.udeb
 c0c378f9c59ae01ddf5ce05ccb86e91a 89428 debian-installer extra rootskel-bootfloppy_1.48_i386.udeb
Package-Type: udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFjYUegm/Kwh6ICoQRAgz3AKDOdeq1eErOBVVYUrEYzq1paNP9RACdEzgv
Xiq1ampL38NQ9vj+PjX43I0=
=AzHa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--- End Message ---

Reply to: