On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:57:58PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 15.11.2016 um 14:03 schrieb Andreas Boll: > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 06:47:00PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > >> Am 13.11.2016 um 19:43 schrieb Michael Biebl: > >>> Am 13.11.2016 um 18:37 schrieb Sven Joachim: > >>>> The toolchain has also changed quite a bit in the past four weeks, with > >>>> gcc having pie enabled by default and binutils at a bleeding edge > >>>> snapshot. Maybe one of those has triggered the build failure. > >>> > >>> That might well be it. Currently mutter still builds fine in stretch. > >>> The new binutils should migrate to testing soon. > >>> I can then retry the build on a mips porter machine with > >>> 2.27.51.20161108-1 > >> > >> binutils 2.27.51.20161108-1 just migrated to stretch. mutter still > >> builds fine in stretch with this version. So I'd say we can cross off > >> binutils from the list of suspects. > > > > As Sven already mentioned these symbols are still available otherwise > > Mesa would FTBFS as we strictly check those symbols in the build with > > > > override_dh_makeshlibs: > > dh_makeshlibs -a -- -c4 > > > > Furthermore I've manually checked libegl1-mesa_12.0.4-2_mips.deb [1] > > with nm that those symbols are still exported. > > > > Mesa could be still affected by a broken binutils. To cross out > > binutils or other toolchain bugs we would need to rebuild Mesa > > 12.0.3-3 (= version in testing) with the current toolchain and build > > mutter against this rebuild of Mesa. > > Michael, could you check this on a mips porter machine? > > > > Unfortunately I can't install arbitrary versions on the porter boxes. > All I get is either a sid or a stretch chroot. >
No problem, it seems James Cowgill already found out that binutils introduced this regression. See also Bug #844357 Maybe merge #844227 and #844357 together. Thanks, Andreas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
