Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 1106712

Summary: zorba: FTBFS in rawhide
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Dennis Gilmore <dennis>
Component: zorbaAssignee: Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: jonathan.robie, martin.gieseking
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-06-22 16:02:04 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1105908    
Attachments:
Description Flags
build.log
none
root.log
none
state.log none

Description Dennis Gilmore 2014-06-09 17:10:10 UTC 
Your package zorba failed to build from source in current rawhide.

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6978367

For details on mass rebuild see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Mass_Rebuild
Comment 1 Dennis Gilmore 2014-06-09 17:10:25 UTC 
Created attachment 905099 [details]
build.log
Comment 2 Dennis Gilmore 2014-06-09 17:10:28 UTC 
Created attachment 905100 [details]
root.log
Comment 3 Dennis Gilmore 2014-06-09 17:10:29 UTC 
Created attachment 905101 [details]
state.log
Comment 4 Martin Gieseking 2014-06-09 17:22:05 UTC 
This is a known issue (see bug 1095292) which seems to be related to gcc 4.9. I haven't been able to track down the issue yet. I don't quite understand what's happening there. It still looks like a bug in gcc's optimizer. The upstream developers are also working on finding the reason for the memory issues but without much success so far.
Comment 5 Martin Gieseking 2014-06-22 16:02:04 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1095292 ***