Errors on x86_64 (broken c++ headers?)

Quentin Spencer qspencer at ieee.org
Thu May 12 16:02:03 UTC 2005


Panu Matilainen wrote:

> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 10:03 -0500, Quentin Spencer wrote:
>>
>>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Quentin Spencer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> So, the errors appear to be caused by the c++ header files. How is it
>>>>> possible that the header files are broken on one arch and not
>>>>> another? Any other insights into what might have caused this and how
>>>>> to fix it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There's something weird about mach and C++, I've seen this and some
>>>> other weirdness just recently myself. The above can be worked around
>>>> by setting
>>>> a suitable CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/include/c++ ... before %configure.
>>>>
>>>> Another oddity I found is that for Wine to build within mach I had 
>>>> to use
>>>> LDFLAGS="-lstdc++" %configure - which doesn't make any sense to me
>>>> either.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the tips.
>>
>> Sorry, these are work-arounds to bugs. They should be inacceptable to be
>> added to rpm specs.
>>
>> g++ is supposed to find its internal headers and libraries without any
>> manual assistance.
>>
>>>  So, this is a bug in mach then?
>>
>> Dunno.
>
> Something weird in the chroot environment obviously but what exactly 
> causes it ... ideas would be more than welcome :)

If something's wrong with the build environment that causes some 
packages to fail when they wouldn't otherwise, maybe we need to allow 
for manual builds when necessary. I agree that it's incorrect to be 
patching our spec files to work around these. I don't have any way of 
debugging this because of lack of access to the hardware, and I don't 
want my package sitting around indefinitely until someone figures out 
why these kind of things are going wrong. Suggestions?

-Quentin




More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list