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

Bug#657806: pkg-kde-tools: representation of covariant return thunks



Package: pkg-kde-tools
Version: 0.14.3
Severity: normal

When I used pkg-kde-tools to generate a symbols template for opensaml2,
there were several hundred symbols with the following pattern:

 (arch=!amd64 !ia64 !kfreebsd-amd64 !s390x)_ZTch0_v0_n124_NK8opensaml7saml2md22OrganizationURLBuilder11buildObjectEPKtS3_S3_PKN10xmltooling5QNameE@Base 2.4.3
 (arch=amd64 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 s390x)_ZTch0_v0_n248_NK8opensaml7saml2md22OrganizationURLBuilder11buildObjectEPKtS3_S3_PKN10xmltooling5QNameE@Base 2.4.3

As you can see, the distinction seems to be whether the architecture is
64-bit, and the difference is the "n124" vs. "n248" part of the mangled
symbol.  But both of these symbols demangle to the same thing:

covariant return thunk to opensaml::saml2md::OrganizationURLBuilder::buildObject(unsigned short const*, unsigned short const*, unsigned short const*, xmltooling::QName const*) const

Rather than adding an explicit list of architectures that are or aren't
64-bit, which is inherently fragile as we add new architectures over
time (for example, I suspect ppc64 needs to be in the above as well),
it looks like this might be a case where pkg-symbolshelper should demangle
the symbol and use a c++ tag so that it will match on all architectures.

I believe all the affected symbols are covariant return thunks.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 3.1.0-1-686-pae (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages pkg-kde-tools depends on:
ii  libdpkg-perl  1.16.1.2
ii  perl          5.14.2-6

Versions of packages pkg-kde-tools recommends:
ii  dpkg-dev     1.16.1.2
ii  libwww-perl  6.03-1

Versions of packages pkg-kde-tools suggests:
ii  cdbs       0.4.100
ii  debhelper  9.20120115

-- no debconf information



Reply to: