FS#26679 - [glibc] bz bug 13344

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Sverd Johnsen (sjohnsen) - Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:01 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:54 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Testing
Status Closed
Assigned To Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Architecture All
Severity Critical
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Looks like this affects us too If I'm not mistaken.

Solution: Upgrade glibc, find packages build against testing glibc, rebuild all affected packages.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747377
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13344
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:54 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Additional comments about closing:  Our current glibc snapshot doesn't include the faulty commit that adds the leaf function attribute in __THROW.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:35 GMT
No, this doesn't affect us. Our snapshot doesn't include the faulty commit: http://sources.redhat.com/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=aa78043a4aafe5db1a1a76d544a833b63b4c5f5c

And if you look at our misc/sys/cdefs.h...

# if !defined __cplusplus && __GNUC_PREREQ (3, 3)
# define __THROW»__attribute__ ((__nothrow__))
# define __NTH(fct)» __attribute__ ((__nothrow__)) fct
# else
# if defined __cplusplus && __GNUC_PREREQ (2,8)
# define __THROW» throw ()
# define __NTH(fct)»fct throw ()
# else
# define __THROW
# define __NTH(fct)»fct
# endif
# endif
Comment by Sverd Johnsen (sjohnsen) - Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:48 GMT
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=patch;h=3871f58f065dac3917eb18220a479e9591769c8c says you are wrong? Not sure ;)

Edit 2: Alright, looks like I was wrong. Allan dodged that one then.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Saturday, 29 October 2011, 17:52 GMT
"Not sure" means you should go take the time to actually look at the tarball that we're building glibc from. Can you even reproduce this?

Loading...