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

Bug#778187: xorg-server: ftbfs with GCC-5



Control: tags -1 patch fixed-upstream

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:38:13 +0000 Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> wrote:
> The package fails to build in a test rebuild on at least amd64 with
> gcc-5/g++-5, but succeeds to build with gcc-4.9/g++-4.9. The
> severity of this report may be raised before the stretch release.

Fixed upstream. The patch applied there is attached.

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/commit/?id=21b896939c5bb242f3aacc37baf12379e43254b6

Thanks,
James
From 21b896939c5bb242f3aacc37baf12379e43254b6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Egbert Eich <eich@freedesktop.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 16:27:05 +0100
Subject: symbols: Fix sdksyms.sh to cope with gcc5

Gcc5 adds additional lines stating line numbers before and
after __attribute__() which need to be skipped.

Signed-off-by: Egbert Eich <eich@freedesktop.org>
Tested-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>

diff --git a/hw/xfree86/sdksyms.sh b/hw/xfree86/sdksyms.sh
index 2305073..05ac410 100755
--- a/hw/xfree86/sdksyms.sh
+++ b/hw/xfree86/sdksyms.sh
@@ -350,13 +350,25 @@ BEGIN {
     if (sdk) {
 	n = 3;
 
+        # skip line numbers GCC 5 adds before __attribute__
+        while ($n == "" || $0 ~ /^# [0-9]+ "/) {
+           getline;
+           n = 1;
+        }
+
 	# skip attribute, if any
 	while ($n ~ /^(__attribute__|__global)/ ||
 	    # skip modifiers, if any
 	    $n ~ /^\*?(unsigned|const|volatile|struct|_X_EXPORT)$/ ||
 	    # skip pointer
-	    $n ~ /^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*\*$/)
+	    $n ~ /^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*\*$/) {
 	    n++;
+            # skip line numbers GCC 5 adds after __attribute__
+            while ($n == "" || $0 ~ /^# [0-9]+ "/) {
+               getline;
+               n = 1;
+            }
+        }
 
 	# type specifier may not be set, as in
 	#   extern _X_EXPORT unsigned name(...)
-- 
cgit v0.10.2

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: