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

Re: Bug#266837: rpvm_0.6.2-1_hppa: FTBFS: relocation R_PARISC_DPREL21L can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC

Raul Miller wrote:
>>> To be honest, it is not pvm's problem that rpvm does not work with
>>> pure upstream pvm on non-i386.
> I agree.
> That said, if someone were to submit a patch for pvm which fit within
> its design, and which made rpvm easier to get working, I think pvm should
> accept that patch.

The only way I can imagine such a patch would be something that made pvm
build a shared libgpvm3 (or a static one with -fPIC), and then we're
unfortunately back where we started.

>> A serious bug, #266837, has been downgraded to whislist.
> That seems to me to be inappropriate.  Dirk Eddelbuettel is the package
> maintainer for rpvm, and Steinar H. Gunderson (the maintainer of pvm)
> downgraded its priority.

I think you've missed a point here (all times converted to UTC):

2004-08-19 11:38: #266837 gets filed as a serious bug against rpvm.
2004-08-19 21:26: Dirk reassigns #266837 to pvm.
2004-08-19 21:30: I set #266837 to wishlist, to merge it with #266762.

As #266837 was assigned to pvm at that point, I cannot see how I would be
tampering in someone else's packages.

> It's appropriate for 266762 to be wishlist, but that has no bearing
> on 266837.

The entire discussion here is whether #266762 is wishlist or not. I claim it
is; the rpvm people claim it is serious.

> I know this leaves rpvm in an awkward state.  I'd suggest [for sarge]
> making it build statically against pvm (maybe with strict requirements on
> the associated installed version of pvm), and incorporating all the bulk
> that implies.  Yes, this places a disproportionate storage requirement
> on rpvm, but this close to release I think stupid simple changes are
> better than more elegant but riskier changes.

The problem is, this is not possible: rpvm _must_ be a shared library (as far
as I've understood, anyhow) to work, and a shared library _cannot_ link
against a static library (well, a non-PIC-compiled one, anyway) on

/* Steinar */
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/

Reply to: