Bug#841923: AW: AW: Bug#841923: libclang-common-3.9-dev: missing multilib binaries

Mon Oct 31 23:56:37 UTC 2016

Hello,

I don`t know if the docker installation got messed up (different so versions than on my native system), but the dh_shlibdeps step won`t find the correct packages for some 32bit libraries.
In case some packages wont build, those errors could be ignored.


diff -burN debian.org/control debian/control

--- debian.org/control	2016-10-31 23:33:26.307560672 +0100
+++ debian/control	2016-10-31 23:36:29.861497749 +0100
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
     cmake, perl, libtool, chrpath, texinfo, sharutils, libffi-dev (>= 3.0.9),
     lsb-release, patchutils, diffstat, xz-utils, python-dev,
     libedit-dev, swig, python-six, python-sphinx, ocaml-nox, binutils-dev,
-    libjsoncpp-dev,
+    libjsoncpp-dev, g++-multilib,
     lcov, procps, help2man, dh-ocaml, zlib1g-dev
 Build-Conflicts: oprofile, ocaml, libllvm-3.4-ocaml-dev, libllvm-3.5-ocaml-dev,
   libllvm-3.8-ocaml-dev, libllvm-3.9-ocaml-dev
diff -burN debian.org/rules debian/rules
--- debian.org/rules	2016-10-31 23:33:26.307560672 +0100
+++ debian/rules	2016-11-01 00:48:08.022283769 +0100
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@
 
 
 override_dh_shlibdeps:
-	LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:$(DEB_INST)/usr/lib/llvm-$(LLVM_VERSION)/lib/ dh_shlibdeps
+	dh_shlibdeps -l$(DEB_INST)/usr/lib/llvm-$(LLVM_VERSION)/lib/ -- --ignore-missing-info
 
 override_dh_installman:
 	dh_installman

________________________________________
Von: Lange Norbert
Gesendet: Montag, 31. Oktober 2016 23:58
An: Sylvestre Ledru; 841923 at bugs.debian.org
Betreff: AW: AW: Bug#841923: libclang-common-3.9-dev: missing multilib binaries

Hi,

patch is attached. I tested a clean docker installation of debian-testing, adding this dependency generates the additional libraries.
Having those built once via the debian build machinery should give us an idea which subtypes are supported, and wether it crashes and burns an some systems (looking at gcc-6 source package theres alot arch.dependend libraries there)

I`ll think of some scriptable tests too, but this will have to smart enough to figure out the expected variants for all supported hosts (ie the suported "multilib" flags).

Kind regards,
Norbert

PS. I would have an idea for the generic multiarch support too. Since clang is a 'native' crosscompiler, it should be possibly to eg. compile a firmware for ARM quite easily, aslong a linker and the support libraries are installed.
Is there interest in getting this easily done in debian, or something underway already (to your knowledge)?
Would take some time to think through and propose.

--- debian.org/control  2016-10-31 23:33:26.307560672 +0100
+++ debian/control      2016-10-31 23:36:29.861497749 +0100
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
     cmake, perl, libtool, chrpath, texinfo, sharutils, libffi-dev (>= 3.0.9),
     lsb-release, patchutils, diffstat, xz-utils, python-dev,
     libedit-dev, swig, python-six, python-sphinx, ocaml-nox, binutils-dev,
-    libjsoncpp-dev,
+    libjsoncpp-dev, g++-multilib,
     lcov, procps, help2man, dh-ocaml, zlib1g-dev
 Build-Conflicts: oprofile, ocaml, libllvm-3.4-ocaml-dev, libllvm-3.5-ocaml-dev,
   libllvm-3.8-ocaml-dev, libllvm-3.9-ocaml-dev


________________________________________
Von: Sylvestre Ledru [sledru at mozilla.com]" im Auftrag von "Sylvestre Ledru [sylvestre at mozilla.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 31. Oktober 2016 18:32
An: Lange Norbert; 841923 at bugs.debian.org
Betreff: Re: AW: Bug#841923: libclang-common-3.9-dev: missing multilib binaries

Hello

If you give me a patch for 3.8 and / or 3.9 and a way to test the new
usage [1], I would be happy to apply it immediatly.

Thanks
Sylvestre
[1]
https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-llvm/llvm-toolchain/branches/qualify-clang.sh?view=markup
=> integrated this way :)
Le 31/10/2016 à 18:29, Lange Norbert a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> yes I know and the bug is for an older version and I added information (that most likely just the build depency is missing).
> I am not really looking through the debian bug report system and how its supposed to be used for this,
>
> Further, the patch I proposed there wouldn`t be needed currently.
>
> For testing... the libraries are plainly missing. I suppose its the automatic build system than just installs the build depencies and nothing else.
> I built the debian source archive locally and it works fine.
>
> Whats left is splitting out the i386 (and i686) libraries, or deciding wether this is actually necessary (debian guidelines about non-native libs?).
> But IMHO this could be done independently.
>
> I am happy to help out, but the mailing list seems to be too high-latency for this. Any proposition how we should go about this?
> If you add the build depencies, I should finally get libraries from the repository just like I built them locally and have used for a long time. I can then use this to start some builds.
>
> If its necessary to split out the libraries, I can work on that if I get some definitive rules ("clang-multiarch" meta-package and lib32 variants?). See https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/gcc-6 how this is done for gcc
> This sure will get tricky, since some libs dont build on x86, some more dont build on mips, etc...
>
>
> Kind Regards,
> Norbert
> ________________________________________
> Von: Sylvestre Ledru [sylvestre at debian.org]
> Gesendet: Montag, 31. Oktober 2016 11:51
> An: Lange Norbert; 841923 at bugs.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Bug#841923: libclang-common-3.9-dev: missing multilib binaries
>
> Hello Norbert,
>
> Le 24/10/2016 à 15:28, Norbert Lange a écrit :
>> Package: libclang-common-3.9-dev
>> Version: 1:3.9-2
>> Severity: important
>>
>> Dear Maintainer,
>>
>> On plattforms such as amd64, the libraries necessary to build for other architectures (i386 in this case) are missing.
>>
>> A local build of the package will however result in those libraries beeing built and packaged,
>> so I believe that the build-depencies for creating the libraries are missing (g++multilib?) and the
>> lvvm build will just silently skip over the libraries it can`t build
>> (this bug is going back to atleast llvm 3.7)
> You already reported bug #829441 about that. I am happy to apply this but I need help for testing it.
>
> Sylvestre
>
>
>
> #####################################################################################
>
> This message and any attachments are solely for the use of the intended recipients. They may contain privileged and/or confidential information or other information protected from disclosure. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your system.
>
> Thank You.
>
> #####################################################################################
>

