On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 08:41:46PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 12/06/2016 08:36 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > >On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be > >>basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present. > >> > >>Rather than having a bug where people are trying to figure out on the > >>fly how to deal with the RPM macro change, and probably more packages > >>are getting rebuilt and broken all the time, I propose we do this: > >> > >>1. *IMMEDIATELY* revert the change to redhat-rpm-config > >>2. Rebuild all packages (at least noarch packages, I guess) that were > >>built since the change landed > >> > >>so we have a non-broken Rawhide. Then we could consider at our leisure > >>how to implement the change properly. > >> > >>Thoughts? > > Is it really that bad, or is it mostly fallout from a misbuilt samba-libs > package? That was totally unexpected—the package does not even use > autoconf. For autoconf, it wouldn't surprise me if the -Werror=implicit-function-declaration addition affected hundreds of packages. It is very common not to have functions prototyped in autoconf snippets. Yeah, it is bad, but it is common. Not everything can be affected by way of failing to build or that is immediately obvious. I guess the only safe way to do this would be to instrument the rpm macros temporarily (in redhat-rpm-config) to grab config.{log,status} files from the build directory and say uuencode them (bzip2ed tarball) on stdout wrapped in some header/footer, then test mass rebuild and save the build.log files, then do another test mass rebuild with the redhat-rpm-config flags change reverted and compare the config.{log.status} files. Jakub _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
