GNU bug report logs - #26220
core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 26220 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 26220 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Subject: core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:20:33 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Is this an appropriate solution?

[0001-gnu-r-rcpp-Fix-build-failure-with-GCC-5.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:24:17 +0100

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:

> Is this an appropriate solution?
> From 216000bc2d05799f3d68ae1806bb4b2ce6ab0782 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:16:58 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: r-rcpp: Fix build failure with GCC-5.
>
> * gnu/packages/statistics.scm (r-rcpp)[native-inputs]: Add gcc-4.9.

I don’t think so.  The real problem is that “gcc” was updated to point
to “gcc-5”, but “gfortran” still points to “gfortran-4.9”.

We should update “gfortran” to point to “gfortran-5” instead (and maybe
add a comment next to the “gcc” definition to remind people to also
update “gfortran”).

I’m not sure if this is accurate but “guix refresh -l gfortran-4.9”
tells me this:

    Building the following 142 packages would ensure 475 dependent
    packages are rebuilt …

What do you think?  Do you want me to push it to core-updates?

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Message #11 received at 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#26220: core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:11:35 +0100

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> skribis:

> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
>
>> Is this an appropriate solution?
>> From 216000bc2d05799f3d68ae1806bb4b2ce6ab0782 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:16:58 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: r-rcpp: Fix build failure with GCC-5.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/statistics.scm (r-rcpp)[native-inputs]: Add gcc-4.9.
>
> I don’t think so.  The real problem is that “gcc” was updated to point
> to “gcc-5”, but “gfortran” still points to “gfortran-4.9”.
>
> We should update “gfortran” to point to “gfortran-5” instead (and maybe
> add a comment next to the “gcc” definition to remind people to also
> update “gfortran”).
>
> I’m not sure if this is accurate but “guix refresh -l gfortran-4.9”
> tells me this:
>
>     Building the following 142 packages would ensure 475 dependent
>     packages are rebuilt …
>
> What do you think?  Do you want me to push it to core-updates?

I think so.  It’s probably better than leaving some of the Fortran
packages in a broken state.

Could you make this change?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #14 received at 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 26220 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#26220: core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:38:57 +0100

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> skribis:
>
>> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
>>
>>> Is this an appropriate solution?
>>> From 216000bc2d05799f3d68ae1806bb4b2ce6ab0782 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:16:58 -0400
>>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: r-rcpp: Fix build failure with GCC-5.
>>>
>>> * gnu/packages/statistics.scm (r-rcpp)[native-inputs]: Add gcc-4.9.
>>
>> I don’t think so.  The real problem is that “gcc” was updated to point
>> to “gcc-5”, but “gfortran” still points to “gfortran-4.9”.
>>
>> We should update “gfortran” to point to “gfortran-5” instead (and maybe
>> add a comment next to the “gcc” definition to remind people to also
>> update “gfortran”).
>>
>> I’m not sure if this is accurate but “guix refresh -l gfortran-4.9”
>> tells me this:
>>
>>     Building the following 142 packages would ensure 475 dependent
>>     packages are rebuilt …
>>
>> What do you think?  Do you want me to push it to core-updates?
>
> I think so.  It’s probably better than leaving some of the Fortran
> packages in a broken state.
>
> Could you make this change?

Done with commit cb4805e34 in core-updates.

-- 
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Message #19 received at 26220-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: 26220-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#26220: core-updates: r-rcpp fails to build with GCC 5
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:17:13 +0200

> Done with commit cb4805e34 in core-updates.

Closing this bug.

-- 
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.