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 1548671 - rockboxUtility does not compile on ppc64le
Summary: rockboxUtility does not compile on ppc64le
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: ppc64le
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard: NotReady
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW PPCTracker
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-02-24 10:38 UTC by philippe ventrillon
Modified: 2020-08-10 00:57 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-08-10 00:57:43 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description philippe ventrillon 2018-02-24 10:38:28 UTC 
The full logs are in the build report :
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25277186

This is the actual cause of the failure :
gcc -MG -MM -MT /builddir/build/BUILD/RockboxUtility-v1.4.0/buildrbutil/build//libs///libspeex/rbspeexdec.o -m64 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DROCKBOX_VOICE_ENCODER -I ../../lib/rbcodec/codecs/libspeex -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wno-unused-parameter -isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk -mmacosx-version-min=10.4 -o /builddir/build/BUILD/RockboxUtility-v1.4.0/buildrbutil/build//libs///libspeex/rbspeexdec.d rbspeexdec.c
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-mmacosx-version-min=10.4'


It seems the build system thinks this is a MAC
Comment 1 Dan Horák 2018-02-24 11:11:37 UTC 
Yup, looks as a wrong assumption (if ppc, then mac) by the buildsystem, it should be reported upstream.
Comment 2 philippe ventrillon 2018-02-24 11:32:22 UTC 
Yes i am going to report the bug upstream
My first goal was to have a bug to be able to place an excludeArch tag in my .spec file while still being conformant to package guidelines.
Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2018-02-24 12:15:52 UTC 
If you have a closer look into the build.log, you'll notice that this package does not honor Fedora's CFLAGS at all.
Comment 4 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-02-25 00:14:53 UTC 
Just a few info :
 - Not needed: Group:, Packager:
 - Use the %{qmake_qt5} macro
 - Use correct format for %changelog (that's where you put your name)
Comment 5 Jason Tibbitts 2018-02-27 19:54:07 UTC 
Why is this filed as a package review?
Comment 6 philippe ventrillon 2018-03-04 19:24:14 UTC 
Thank you for your help and acomments.

I have tried to set a %{ qmake_qt4 } macro instead of invoking qt-make directly. Unfortunately it makes the program to not compile anymore.
I get lots of errors like : 
/usr/bin/ld: /home/ventrill/projects/rpm/rbutil5/RockboxUtility-v1.4.0/buildrbutil/build//libs//librbspeex.a(rbspeex.o): relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


I think i will need time and help from upstream to investigate this.


I opened this bug to have a number to place in the spec file nearby the excludeArch tag. When i opened the bug package review seemed to me the most suitable.
Comment 7 Package Review 2020-07-10 00:56:29 UTC 
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.
Comment 8 Package Review 2020-08-10 00:57:43 UTC 
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.