From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OoIRy-0002da-WE for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:03:43 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A3092E0B4D for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:03:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com (mail-bw0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07F1FE083D for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz1 with SMTP id 1so1030863bwz.40 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:54:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.30.200 with SMTP id v8mr5828293bkc.190.1282751639887; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.8.1] (host249-252-static.95-94-b.business.telecomitalia.it [94.95.252.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y2sm1150685bkx.20.2010.08.25.08.53.58 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Diego_Elio_Petten=C3=B2?= Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] QA confusion: Upstream qa issues -> failing to install From: Diego Elio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Petten=F2?= To: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20100825142023.GA11809@Mystical> References: <201008251342.14948.bangert@gentoo.org> <20100825142023.GA11809@Mystical> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-nDCwyLEzdNO7vsCeRymo" Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:55:07 +0200 Message-ID: <1282751707.30896.16.camel@yamato.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 X-Archives-Salt: 43efc53c-95ae-458b-8c6f-d330f409360f X-Archives-Hash: 8e570a7df54684f4846a9f9cb2528be5 --=-nDCwyLEzdNO7vsCeRymo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Il giorno mer, 25/08/2010 alle 17.20 +0300, Markos Chandras ha scritto: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 01:42:12PM +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote: > > * QA Notice: Package has poor programming practices which may compile > > * fine but exhibit random runtime failures. > > * closefromtest.c:46: warning: implicit declaration of function=20 > > =E2=80=98closefrom=E2=80=99 > > > This is a rather common bug for 64bit arches Actually no; the one common for 64bit arches is "implicit pointer conversion" warning (which may be caused by an implicit declaration, since implicit declarations default to int as return type!) that is always fatal on 64-bit (it would crash the code as the returned pointer would be crippled. What this bug is about is rather the kind of errors that I've commented on in [1], [2] and [3] which is that they _may_ be related to macros or functions that are not declared/defined by the current set of library dependencies, and would then lead to unresolved undefined symbols, and thus, to runtime failure. > This is not only related to stricter but also related to CFLAGS ( having = -ggdb > and -Wall, produce same failures for me even if I don't use stricter ) >=20 > Diego, any ideas why this happens? -Wall & -ggdb produce extra output on > warning that makes portage abort because of that? I always wondered why t= his > is happening. They are not issues for users to care much about, but if _you_ are maintaining a package that have those warnings should probably go fix them; upstream and in Gentoo; in my last blog post [4] I have noted that we should really just use stricter for _our_ packages, not _all_ packages, as it makes it bothersome and lead to more people just forgetting about stricter (I don't use it, for instance). [1] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/08/18/compounded-issues-in-glibc-2-12 [2] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/08/19/fixed-in-overlay-read-not-fixed [3] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/02/03/ruby-ng-the-nth-fork [4] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/08/24/gentoo-needs-you-a-few-things-that-woul= d-definitely-be-useful --=20 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 =E2=80=94 =E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/ --=-nDCwyLEzdNO7vsCeRymo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABAgAGBQJMdTzZAAoJEBqCrVe7WSRDDqUH/0D++r0nhSqeuXd5g271rDhW TpdDhOxdBTFTZ5hPVQktVQkz8bpKEzIZLMefnbsHvNw7Ix2amVYD5Z2hFXGFUuWw PILekgIRrqIpt3/9lL2Hl5lYLa+t6NOXOnE1OJjazTK5fU/AM+iWelGg2m0PEJne M9yrXy0m3+Iq9RcxQas+fsAtdyJ4p981gQp58f8oUN2d6wqJkpKGZjUKgmL0KeQ7 pqXMu+VhLXS1FUBVL+mZR5DymtMSF5lo3dh+FfeIj6I4FWeRxLDMojMgcEH8Oohl SJ8VJKGNQKYmuBVFUYAYG9w3g2cUghInV3u6thvuY03VEvcYJw2GWT4E3cu0VTw= =w+gr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-nDCwyLEzdNO7vsCeRymo--