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.

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

sys-apps/the_silver_searcher: define _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE for non glib… #31186

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

listout
Copy link
Contributor

@listout listout commented May 27, 2023

…c systems

@gentoo-bot
Copy link

Pull Request assignment

Submitter: @listout
Areas affected: ebuilds
Packages affected: sys-apps/the_silver_searcher

sys-apps/the_silver_searcher: @wraeth

Linked bugs

No bugs to link found. If your pull request references any of the Gentoo bug reports, please add appropriate GLEP 66 tags to the commit message and request reassignment.

If you do not receive any reply to this pull request, please open or link a bug to attract the attention of maintainers.


In order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append [please reassign] to the pull request title.

Docs: Code of ConductCopyright policy (expl.) ● DevmanualGitHub PRsProxy-maint guide

@gentoo-bot gentoo-bot added assigned PR successfully assigned to the package maintainer(s). no bug found No Bug/Closes found in the commits. labels May 27, 2023
@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2023-05-27 14:38 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 7beaeec
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/5e6a2a5125/output.html

@thesamesam
Copy link
Member

This isn't right, see https://bugs.gentoo.org/903611#c0.

@listout
Copy link
Contributor Author

listout commented May 28, 2023

This isn't right, see https://bugs.gentoo.org/903611#c0.

Is typedef-ing off_t off64_t alright?

@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2023-05-28 06:13 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 3a61c6d
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/50ff7cb6fa/output.html

Using data types from _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE is discouraged as it will be
removed in later versions of musl.

Signed-off-by: Brahmajit Das <brahmajit.xyz@gmail.com>
@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2023-05-28 06:33 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 112126d
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/cbffcfe590/output.html

listout added a commit to listout/the_silver_searcher that referenced this pull request Jul 20, 2023
First discovered in while building on musl [1]. This is because
musl-1.2.4 (9999 right now) will remove/removes the LFS compatibility
hacks, like fopen64:
  - https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=246f1c811448f37a44b41cd8df8d0ef9736d95f4
  - https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=25e6fee27f4a293728dd15b659170e7b9c7db9bc

The gist is that bad configure tests (suffering from
-Wimplicit-function-declaration) would build and link
successfully because musl provided these symbols as aliases, despite not
needing them (musl natively supports both LFS & time64).

To head this off, these aliases are now gone, but remain in libc.so for binary compatibility.

The proper fix is to just use the regular functions and not anything _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
As a temporary workaround you can typedef off_t to off64_t [2] to get it
working.

[1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/908582
[2]: gentoo/gentoo#31186
Signed-off-by: Brahmajit Das <brahmajit.xyz@gmail.com>
@thesamesam
Copy link
Member

This isn't right, see bugs.gentoo.org/903611#c0.

Is typedef-ing off_t off64_t alright?

It's tolerable but I'd prefer it if we didn't.

See https://bugs.gentoo.org/903611#c0, but I could've maybe been more verbose (I'll write something up on the wiki later):

  • Drop off64* etc usage
  • Pass -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 (to make glibc work)
  • Party on

@thesamesam thesamesam added the work in progress The PR is not yet ready to be merged. label May 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
assigned PR successfully assigned to the package maintainer(s). no bug found No Bug/Closes found in the commits. work in progress The PR is not yet ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
4 participants