On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> wrote: > Domenico Andreoli a écrit : >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:47:11PM +0100, Domenico Andreoli wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> wrote: >>>> On 05.11.2009 14:30, Domenico Andreoli wrote: >>>>> frankly i do not know what to do next, besides trying to rebuild gcc-4.4 >>>>> 4.4.2-1 with latest eglibc to see if it is the culprit >>>> or rebuild against eglibc-2.9. could you do this as a test? >>> yes, build started >> >> the gcc 4.4.2-2 built with eglibc 2.9-25 has not the problem and current >> gcc 4.4.2-1 is built with eglibc 2.9-26 [0]. should i try building >> 4.4.2-1 with eglibc 2.10.1-5 or are we convinced it is NPTL? > > At least we are convinced it's eglibc 2.10.1, not 100% sure it is due to > NPTL. > > I have done some more tests, showing it's a bit more complicated than > that. apt-get from stable/testing/unstable: > - works with libstdc++6 built against eglibc 2.9 > - segfaults with libstdc++6 built against eglibc 2.10.1 > > Then I tried to rebuild apt against the "broken" libstdc++6. > Surprisingly this new apt-get: > - works with libstdc++6 built against eglibc 2.10.1 > - segfaults with libstdc++6 built against eglibc 2.9 > > So in short, it seems that using eglibc 2.10.1 to build libstdc++6 > triggers an ABI change on this library. I haven't investigated more for > now, I am not sure when I'll have time to do it.
This is not surprising, Dave has already pointed out that the debian libstdc++6 testsuite run clearly has an ABI failure e.g. ~~~ FAIL: abi_check ~~~ I'm running a build with --without-cloog/--without-ppl to see if that corrects the testsuite failures. We need to stop allowing packages to build if the testsuite runs aren't clean. Cheers, Carlos. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
