[Monotone-debian] Bug#432659: marked as done (monotone: FTBFS on alpha, configure fails mysteriously)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:09:48 -0700
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line monotone: FTBFS on alpha, configure fails mysteriously
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> monotone: FTBFS on alpha, configure fails mysteriously
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:40:06 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mutt/1.5.11
>
>
>
>
> Package: monotone
> Version: 0.35-1
> Severity: serious
>
> The configure fails mysteriously on alpha:
>
> checking whether the compiler supports tr1::unordered_map... no
> checking for early 4.0-series g++ bug in tr1 hashtables... yes
> checking whether C++ streams support sync_with_stdio... configure: error: could 
> not generate input for test 1
> See `config.log' for more details.
> make: *** [config.status] Error 1
>
> This is the only architecture where the configure fails.
>
> Please look in the configure script to see if there is anything specific
> to alpha.  If not, let's attempt the build again with the next upload.
> If it fails again, I suggest we drop alpha from the list of supported
> architectures for this package.
>
> -- 
> Ludovic Brenta.
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: monotone: FTBFS on alpha, configure fails mysteriously
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:09:48 -0700
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 10:38:21AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > If you look carefully at the buildd log for this one, you see it went
> > off the rails a long time before that...
>
> > checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... no
> > checking whether g++ accepts -g... no
> > checking dependency style of g++... none
> > checking for C++ compiler warning flags... unknown
>
> > ^^ this looks like a completely nonfunctional C++ compiler.  Actually,
> > there are problems even earlier:
>
> > The following extra packages will be installed:
> >  cpp-2.95 g++-2.95 gcc-2.95 libboost-filesystem1.34.0 libboost-regex1.34.0
> >  libc6.1-dev libicu36 libicu36-dev libstdc++2.10-dev libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
> >  linux-libc-dev zlib1g-dev
>
> > ^^ g++ *2.95*?!  What on earth is it doing using that dinosaur?
> > Upstream doesn't support anything before 3.3, and would like to bump
> > that to 3.4.
>
> > I need advice from the alpha porters on what might be wrong here and
> > how to proceed.  debian-alpha cc:ed.
>
> The most recent upload of glibc to unstable has introduced a libc-dev
> dependency which is in conflict with the sbuild configuration on multiple
> buildds.  As a result, libstdc++-dev has gone missing from these chroots,
> and the buildd admin will need to make some changes to restore
> build-essential in these environments.
>
> Closing the bug report since this is not a bug in monotone.
>
> -- 
> Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
> Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
> address@hidden                                   http://www.debian.org/
>
> --- End Message ---