| 1 |
Am Mon, 22 May 2017 19:33:55 +0200 |
| 2 |
schrieb Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@×××.de>: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > On Monday 22 May 2017 09:49:01 Jörg Schaible wrote: |
| 7 |
> >> Hi Peter, |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> >> [snip] |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> [...] |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> well, this does not seem to be the complete truth. When I switched |
| 16 |
> >> to gcc 5.x I did a revdep-rebuild for anything that was compiled |
| 17 |
> >> against libstdc++.so.6 just like the according news entry was |
| 18 |
> >> recommending. And I am quite sure that those Qt plugins were part |
| 19 |
> >> of my 515 recompiled packages. |
| 20 |
> >> |
| 21 |
> >> Nevertheless, my KDE 4 apps were broken after the update to Qt |
| 22 |
> >> 4.8.7. Rebuilding anything that was using libQtCore.so.4 solved |
| 23 |
> >> it, but I fail to see how this is related to the gcc update two |
| 24 |
> >> weeks ago. |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > I can only suggest you read bug report 618922 if you haven't |
| 27 |
> > already, including following its reference to bug 595618. It makes |
| 28 |
> > sense to me. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> It does not for me. My packages were already compiled with gcc-5.4.0. |
| 31 |
> Those Buzilla issues only talk about (plasma/qt) packages compiled |
| 32 |
> with previous gcc-4.x which are supposed to be incompatible. All of |
| 33 |
> the plasma/qt related packages that have been recompiled, because |
| 34 |
> they were built upon libQtCore.so.4 were already recompiled with |
| 35 |
> gcc5. I've checked my logs. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Is the problem maybe order of building packages? |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
From your description I see one edge case: Plasma could have been |
| 40 |
compiled with gcc-5 but linked to qt still built with gcc-4. Then, qt |
| 41 |
was rebuilt after this and is compiled by gcc-5 now. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Without reading the bug report I would guess that is what the bug is |
| 44 |
about: Linking plasma against gcc-4 built qt binaries... Even when you |
| 45 |
rebuild qt with gcc-5 after this, you'd need to relink plasma. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
From your logs, you should see the order in which those packages were |
| 48 |
rebuilt and linked. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
revdep-rebuild is not always able to perfectly order packages right for |
| 51 |
emerge, and emerge in turn has no problem with wrong ordering because |
| 52 |
it is rebuilding packages and the dependency constraints are already |
| 53 |
fulfilled (read: runtime and build deps are already there). Portage |
| 54 |
does not consider rebuilds as a hard dependency/precondition for |
| 55 |
rebuilding other packages... |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
As far as I understood, "--changed-deps" should fix this and also |
| 58 |
rebuild packages depending on the rebuilt packages _after_ they've been |
| 59 |
rebuilt. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
The "--empty" option would have a similar effect, tho rebuild many more |
| 62 |
packages. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
You could've tried if "revdep-rebuild ... -- --changed-deps" would've |
| 65 |
done anything better. I would be interested... |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
-- |
| 69 |
Regards, |
| 70 |
Kai |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Replies to list-only preferred. |
Archives