Re: Bug#897416: mpfr4: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64
On Wed, 2018-05-02 at 12:51 +0100, James Clarke wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 gcc-7
> Control: retitle -1 gcc: Decimal float support is not enabled on kfreebsd-
> amd64
>
> On 2 May 2018, at 10:38, Svante Signell <svante.signell@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Source: mpfr4
> > Version: 4.0.1-1
> > Severity: important
> > Tags: patch
> > User: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
> > Usertags: kfreebsd
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > mpfr4 FTBFS on kFreebsd-amd64 due to mismatches in the
> > debian/libmpfr6.symbols
> > file. Attached is a file with the symbols generated from the build:
> > libmpfr6.symbols.kfreebsd-amd64.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> You're right that the symbols file is currently wrong, but IMO gcc should have
> decimal float support enabled for kfreebsd-amd64. It's enabled for
> kfreebsd-i386 by virtue of the fact that i?86*-*-gnu* (for Hurd) matches
> kfreebsd-i386's tuple, but there's no corresponding x86_64*-*-gnu* for a
> future
> 64-bit Hurd, and thus kfreebsd-amd64's tuple is not matched[0].
>
> James
>
> [0] https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/trunk/config/dfp.m4#L23-L26
Hi James,
I think it is unfortunate that you reassigned this bug to gcc-7. That will not
solve the mpfr4 build on the buildds.
There are two ways to solve this problem:
1)
- reassign this bug back to mpfr4, adding the libfr6.symbols.kfreebsd-amd64 in
next version 4.0.1-2.
- clone this bug to gcc-7, adding a patch to dfp.m4 so it can be integrated in
next release of gcc-7: 7.3.0-18?
2) (not preferred)
- Build an NMUed version of mpfr4, 4.0.1-1.1, and install it at debian-ports.
For GNU/Hurd the entry in sources.list is
deb http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports unreleased main
What about creating
http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-kfreebsd-{amd64,i386} and populate
the mpfr4 packages there at pool-kfreebsd-amd64/m/. Additionally the buildds
need to use these packages. Unfortunately I don't know how to do that.
Then when gcc-7-7.3.0-18 is released, an updated version of mpfr4 is hopefully
available (if not, what to do, how to get back to using the old version?)
Reply to: