Re: Bug#572384: opal_3.6.6~dfsg-4/hppa FTBFS: undefined reference to `non-virtual thunk to PVXMLSession::Trigger()'
[debian-hppa readers, please Cc me and the bug on replies; thanks]
On Thu, March 18, 2010 11:32, Eugen Dedu wrote:
> Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> opal_3.6.6~dfsg-4 fails to build on hppa (tried four times).
>>
>>>From the end of the build log:
[...]
>> ../../lib_linux_hppa/libopal.so: undefined reference to `non-virtual
>> thunk to PVXMLSession::Trigger()'
[...]
> The PVXMLSession::Trigger() functions which give errors are found in
> ptlib, but in both cases the same ptlib package was used, cf.
> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=opal;ver=3.6.6~dfsg-3;arch=hppa;stamp=1255622898
> and
> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=opal;ver=3.6.6~dfsg-4;arch=hppa;stamp=1268343033
>
> Unpacking libpt2.6.5 (from .../libpt2.6.5_2.6.5-1_hppa.deb) ...
> and
> Unpacking libpt2.6.5 (from .../libpt2.6.5_2.6.5-1_hppa.deb) ...
>
>
> On the other hand, the changes between the two versions of opal package
> are really non-intrusive, I attach to this e-mail the diff between
> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/opal/opal_3.6.6~dfsg-3.diff.gz
> and
> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/opal/opal_3.6.6~dfsg-4.diff.gz
>
>
> So I would rather expect a failure due to the compiler (4.3->4.4), which
> is different:
> Toolchain package versions: libc6-dev_2.9-26 linux-libc-dev_2.6.30-8
> g++-4.3_4.3.4-5 gcc-4.3_4.3.4-5 binutils_2.19.91.20090927-1
> libstdc++6_4.4.1-6 libstdc++6-4.3-dev_4.3.4-5
> and
> Toolchain package versions: libc6-dev_2.10.2-6 dpkg-dev_1.15.5.6
> linux-libc-dev_2.6.32-9 g++-4.4_4.4.3-3 gcc-4.4_4.4.3-3
> binutils_2.20.1-2 libstdc++6_4.4.3-3 libstdc++6-4.4-dev_4.4.3-3
>
> Are you aware of such a problem on hppa architecture (the other
> architectures build well, and there is no #define ...HPPA... in .cpp
> files)? Maybe this is linked to
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=558999 ?
I'm not aware of any issues myself. I've CCed the HPPA porter list to see
if they have any ideas.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: