1 |
On 2022.09.10 13:56, David Haller wrote: |
2 |
> Hello, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2022, Jack wrote: |
5 |
> >I now get this error trying to emerge two different packages: |
6 |
> libofx-0.10.7 |
7 |
> >and gnupg (both 2.2.39 and 2.3.6). It might also be the same |
8 |
> problem for a |
9 |
> >few bugs on b.g.o found by searching on "cannot create exectuables." |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> >The relevant lines from build.log are |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> >checking for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc |
14 |
> >checking whether the C compiler works... no |
15 |
> >configure: error: in |
16 |
> >`/var/tmp/portage/dev-libs/libofx-0.10.7/work/libofx-0.10.7': |
17 |
> >configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables |
18 |
> >See `config.log' for more details |
19 |
> > |
20 |
> >and from config.log: |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> >configure:2941: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -V >&5 |
23 |
> >x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-V' |
24 |
> >x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: no input files |
25 |
> >compilation terminated. |
26 |
> >configure:2952: $? = 1 |
27 |
> >configure:2941: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -qversion >&5 |
28 |
> >x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option |
29 |
> '-qversion'; |
30 |
> >did you mean '--version'? |
31 |
> >x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: no input files |
32 |
> >compilation terminated. |
33 |
> >configure:2952: $? = 1 |
34 |
> |
35 |
> These tests are normal fails with gcc, they are version checks for |
36 |
> other compilers. |
37 |
> |
38 |
> >configure:2972: checking whether the C compiler works |
39 |
> >configure:2994: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -march=native -O2 -pipe -og |
40 |
> -ggdb |
41 |
> >-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--as-needed conftest.c >&5 |
42 |
> >configure:2998: $? = 0 |
43 |
> >configure:3036: result: no |
44 |
> >configure: failed program was: |
45 |
> [..boilerplate..] |
46 |
> >configure:3041: error: in |
47 |
> >`/var/tmp/portage/dev-libs/libofx-0.10.7/work/libofx-0.10.7': |
48 |
> >configure:3043: error: C compiler cannot create executables |
49 |
> >See `config.log' for more details |
50 |
> > |
51 |
> >The thing I find curious is that it appears to me that the output of |
52 |
> the test |
53 |
> >compile is a file called "g" which I don't recall ever seeing, and |
54 |
> so I |
55 |
> >wonder if the problem is that something has changed with gcc |
56 |
> defaults and |
57 |
> >configure does not yet recognize that change. I also don't know the |
58 |
> >significance of the two "fatal error: no input files". |
59 |
> > |
60 |
> >The fact that this happens with two unrelated packages suggests that |
61 |
> it's |
62 |
> >not specific to either of them, but something in my system or |
63 |
> configuration. |
64 |
> |
65 |
> And it's a standard autoconf macro, namely AC_PROG_CC that results in |
66 |
> the error and the stuff before that is also standard. And as no |
67 |
> autoreconf is called, autotools versions should not matter. |
68 |
> |
69 |
> >Any thoughts or suggestions? |
70 |
> |
71 |
> I use gcc 11.3.0 here as well, and have no problem. Check for the |
72 |
> variables CC, CFLAGS, CPPFLAGS, LDFLAGS and LIBS in |
73 |
> /var/tmp/portage/dev-libs/libofx-0.10.7/temp/environment. |
74 |
> |
75 |
> Somehow, that '-og' must have crept in there. |
76 |
David - thank you, thank you, thank you. |
77 |
|
78 |
No wonder my recent debugging wasn't doing what I expected. That stray |
79 |
"-og" was supposed to be "-Og" (upper instead of lower case) and it is |
80 |
in /etc/portage/env/debug.conf, which is referenced in |
81 |
/etc/portage/package.env for those packages I wish to compile with |
82 |
various debugging related compiler settings, as well as not deleting |
83 |
the build dir, even on success. |
84 |
|
85 |
It shows what a fresh pair of eyes can do. When looking at the various |
86 |
error related files, I really just saw -Og, and when you pointed that |
87 |
out, my first thought was why any debugging setting would possible |
88 |
cause this type of failure. Of course in hindsight, it now all makes |
89 |
sense. |
90 |
|
91 |
Thanks again to the list for all sorts of ongoing assistance. |
92 |
|
93 |
Jack |