ld has been inconsistently upgraded on the buildfarm

[Jake Goerzen]

On 12/12/13 12:00, Yann Rouillard wrote:
> No significant answer from Oracle for 3 weeks now.
> I am asking for update on a weekly basis but I don't have matter to 
> increase the priority of this issue as there is not production impact 
> and an easy workaround.
>
> I do think we will eventually get an answer.
>
> Yann
>
>
>
> 2013/12/12 Dagobert Michelsen via buildfarm 
> <buildfarm at lists.opencsw.org <mailto:buildfarm at lists.opencsw.org>>
>
>     Hi Jake,
>
>     Am 12.12.2013 um 19:53 schrieb Jake Goerzen via buildfarm:
>     > On 11/13/13 06:16, Dagobert Michelsen via buildfarm wrote:
>     >> Am 13.11.2013 um 10:03 schrieb Laurent Blume via buildfarm
>     <buildfarm at lists.opencsw.org <mailto:buildfarm at lists.opencsw.org>>:
>     >>> Regularly, I'm having silly issues with linking on the
>     buildfarm with different behaviour on x86 and sparc.
>     >>> This time, in krb5-lib: with the same recipe, some binaries
>     get linked to libintl.so on unstable10s, and they don't on
>     unstable10x.
>     >>> On my home system, x86, they do get linked.
>     >>>
>     >>> I'm noticing that ld on the buildfarm is not at all consistent:
>     >>>
>     >>> At home:
>     >>> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin        10300 janv 14  2013
>     /usr/ccs/bin/ld
>     >>>
>     >>> unstable10s:
>     >>> $ ls -l /usr/ccs/bin/ld
>     >>> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin        10788 Jan 16  2013
>     /usr/ccs/bin/ld
>     >>>
>     >>> unstable10x:
>     >>> $ ls -l /usr/ccs/bin/ld
>     >>> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin        10172 Jul  4  2011
>     /usr/ccs/bin/ld
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> Since it's part of the kernel patch, I gather that unstable10x
>     was kept back for some reason, as its kernel is older.
>     >>>
>     >>> Can unstable10x be upgraded? I am reasonably sure it would fix
>     some of the linking issues I'm hitting right now.
>     >>
>     >> I would prefer not to unless we fully understand the issue as
>     discussed on irc.
>     >
>     > Hi Dago,
>     >
>     > Has there been any update on the issue of ld being inconsistent
>     on the buildfarm yet?  I have been putting off working on some
>     things until a resolution has been found.
>
>     Yann has a case open at Oracle, but I doubt we get anything useful
>     out of it.
>     For now I recommend just adding the extra deps and unconditionally
>     overriding
>     them for i386. For mid-term William told me he will get some T5220
>     and he would
>     be willing to give one to the project. This would allow me another
>     build-only
>     machine which is not going to be updated. Then we could also
>     really stick to
>     u8 (or u5?) for all packaging zones. But don't expect this before
>     q2 2014.
>
>     Sorry for the inconvenience
>
>       -- Dago
>
>

Thank you all for your efforts and contributions!  I will use the work 
around as suggested.  Great idea about setting up the T5220 build-only host!

Best Regards,
/Jake
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20131212/03d2e273/attachment-0001.html>