Peter Robinson wrote:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1449113
Unrelated to this issue, but please use "make V=1" so we see the actual
build command lines in the build.log (see the thread about the new
automake).
With V=1
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1450335&name=build.log
AFAIS, your spec doesn't seem to pass RPM_OPT_FLAGS correctly, as well as
does the package seems to play dirty games with CFLAGS. I haven't checked
details, though.
FWIW: Build breakdowns on ppc64 often are caused by not passing
RPM_OPT_FLAGS correctly or a package playing dirty games with
CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.
The dirty games were to try and work out this issue with PPC64 (it
built fine on the rest of them)
Well, this is expected ;)
AFAICT, on the ppc64, the default/implicit -mXXX flags in GCC diverge
from what is in RPM_OPT_FLAGS, so you end up with incorrectly compiled
binaries, if not correctly passing through RPM_OPT_FLAGS.
Conversely, if not passing RPM_OPT_FLAGS, one often gets away with "no
build-breakdowns" on all targets, but is facing the kind of issue your
are facing on the ppc64.
Furthermore, several GCC flags people are using in dirty CFLAGS tricks
often actually are target-specific, which will cause build-breakdowns on
more exotic target. -ggdb is one of these non-portable options, but I am
not sufficiently familiar with RH's ppc64 to be able to judge if -ggdb
is valid on RH-ppc64.
Ralf
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
