On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:30 AM Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:02:22AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > This is already happening, gcc was updated, I see bugs for gcc 9 related > > FTBFS being open. This is not a proper way to coordinate this kind of thing. > > I'm sorry, I forgot to create the every year feature request for GCC this > year and only realized that when I've successfully built first non-scratch > gcc 9 rpms. I believe Carlos has been mentioning GCC when F30 mass rebuild > has been discussed and GCC updates is something that has been done every > year in Fedora since at least Fedora 9 (we've skipped GCC 4.2 release back > in 2007). > > That said, a test mass rebuild has been performed (this year by Jeff Law) > and issues have been analyzed. Sorry for digging up this thread, but since this is a recurring change it appears that the mass rebuild is not enough by itself. As of today lcov doesn't work with GCC 9.x [1] and it would be nice if either: - gcc provided an option to use a previous gcov format when a new one lands (I understand it makes things more complicated) - the Fedora lcov spec would run `make test` in a %check section Ideally both for the sake of continuity/easier transitions. At the very least we would learn with the latter at mass rebuild time that such a problem exists. TIL that lcov is a noarch package, I had no idea! And fortunately clang and llvm-cov are still using the old format so for now I can still build code coverage reports but it's a bit annoying to discover this after upgrading. Dridi [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/lcov/issues/58 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
