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 1OnAuO-000277-0j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:48:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 03FB2E0784; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wlym.com (wlym.com [66.135.63.43]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD4FE0784 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:47:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ccs.covici.com (pool-71-171-112-166.clppva.fios.verizon.net [71.171.112.166]) (authenticated bits=128) by wlym.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id o7MDlpx7030495 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 08:47:53 -0500 Received: from ccs.covici.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ccs.covici.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o7MDllmK018223 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 09:47:50 -0400 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly In-reply-to: References: <17550.1282481535@ccs.covici.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Arttu V." message dated "Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:29:09 +0300." X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; GNU Emacs 23.2.1 Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 09:47:47 -0400 Message-ID: <18221.1282484867@ccs.covici.com> From: covici@ccs.covici.com Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Archives-Salt: e3aab21a-0635-4895-8f61-ee7ff8bcbcbd X-Archives-Hash: c4ace44de801178c13623d6c3c264e8e Arttu V. wrote: > On 8/22/10, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > Hi. I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged -- > > amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however > > after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to > > S_ISCHR. I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not > > supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem. > > > > Any ideas on this would be appreciated. > > Which package is failing? Please check if it is already reported, and > if not then please report a new bug, and if possible make it block > this tracker bug: > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331665 > > A wild guess out of the blue would be that the error could be simply a > missing include of stat.h in the package's sources. But there might be > other omissions as well, so please provide more info. > > I think that unless API/ABIs were changed then the older, already > installed version should still work just fine, as then the missing > includes would only affect compile-time situation. > OK, I will check on that -- I am thinking that for that package a missing include will fix this, but I could shoot whoever broke this without thinking at all. I wonder if the failure of php to compile because my_compiler.h is missing has something to do with this also? -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici covici@ccs.covici.com