On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 00:34 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> | -Object: ./tmp/network-console/tree/lib/libgcc_s.so.1-so-stripped
> […]
> | +1170 symbols, 38 unresolved
> | +Traceback (most recent call last):
> | + File "/usr/bin/mklibs", line 560, in <module>
> | + raise Exception("No library provides non-weak %s" % name)
> | +Exception: No library provides non-weak __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0
>
> libgcc_s.so.1 comes from a gcc package, and there's been a gcc-4.9
> package in unstable for 2 days, which might match. But then I don't
> see any difference in package contents or symbols list for the
> libgcc1 packages between 1:4.9.1-5 and 1:4.9.1-7. I'm afraid I'm
> running out of the time to dig deeper into what's mklibs is after
> (possibly a _pic.a but I don't see any for libgcc_s). Having both
> a glibc and a gcc-4.9 upload in the said time window could explain
> this regression, as a wild guess.
The Internet(tm) seems to think that __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0 comes from
libunwind, but the wifi in this hotel is making it a rather slow job to
figure out what might be depending on that and/or whether there
is/should be a udeb for it, I'll try and investigate further though.
Interesting that only the network-console flavour is affected....
> Could somebody from debian-arm@ (x-d-cc) check what's going on
> precisely and possibly forward the failure to the right place if
> d-i isn't the buggy package here?
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Mraw,
> KiBi.
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1408672231.17003.13.ca...@hellion.org.uk
