Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

satallax: fix build with GCC 9 #81588

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

satallax: fix build with GCC 9 #81588

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

vbgl
Copy link
Contributor

@vbgl vbgl commented Mar 3, 2020

Motivation for this change

It does not build with gcc9

ZHF: #80379

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Ping @NixOS/nixos-release-managers

JohnAZoidberg
JohnAZoidberg requested changes Mar 3, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@JohnAZoidberg JohnAZoidberg left a comment •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With NIX_CFLAGS_COMPILE = "-fpermissive"; it builds with GCC9 as well ;)

@vbgl
Copy link
Contributor Author

vbgl commented Mar 3, 2020

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ve just applied it.

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from 7c6f434c March 3, 2020 14:30
@vbgl vbgl changed the title satallax: use GCC 8 satallax: fix build with GCC 9 Mar 3, 2020
@Ma27
Copy link
Member

Ma27 commented Mar 4, 2020

To quote gcc(1):

-fpermissive
    Downgrade some diagnostics about nonconformant code from errors to warnings.  Thus, using -fpermissive allows some nonconforming code to compile.

I'm wondering: is it really a good idea to allow nonconforming code to compile just to use a newer gcc? I may be totally wrong here, but I generally tried to find another solution if -fpermissive could've been used when I was fixing build regressions because of newer gcc versions. Also, gcc8 is still supported by upstream, so I don't think that it would hurt if we use gcc8 for now and wait for satallax-upstream to fix the issue.

@JohnAZoidberg
Copy link
Member

JohnAZoidberg commented Mar 5, 2020 •
edited

You're right.
Unfortunately the project seems to have stalled and we cannot expect a fix from upstream.
Luckily it was quite easy to fix. I made a new PR: #81796

@Ma27
Copy link
Member

Ma27 commented Mar 8, 2020

Fixed in #81796

@Ma27 Ma27 closed this Mar 8, 2020
@vbgl vbgl deleted the satallax-gcc9 branch March 8, 2020 15:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@JohnAZoidberg JohnAZoidberg JohnAZoidberg approved these changes

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c Awaiting requested review from 7c6f434c

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 0 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@vbgl @Ma27 @JohnAZoidberg