Bug#898502: ucommon: Please update symbols for riscv64 and ia64

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

2018-05-13 12:05 GMT+02:00 Adrian Bunk <bunk at debian.org>:
>
> Builds in reproducible on all 4 architectures:
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/ucommon.html
>
> Lowering the severity.

Thanks for the correction.

>> It's strange that symbols change in this way with the same GCC major version,
>> the compiler was 7.2 when compiled in the other arches.  But the alternative
>> explanation that the symbols are fine in all arches except in ia64 and riscv64
>> is even more improbable IMO, given the additional coincidade of build dates.
>>...
>
> These have explicit architecture lists in the symbols file,
> so not a real surprise when they also appear on new architectures.

Indeed, I was looking at the wrong pattern in the symbols file.


> --- debian/libucommon8.symbols.old      2018-05-13 09:18:17.048018630 +0000
> +++ debian/libucommon8.symbols  2018-05-13 09:20:12.696017528 +0000
> @@ -2166,16 +2166,8 @@
>   (c++)"ucommon::String::unquote(char*, char const*)@Base" 7.0.0
>   (c++)"ucommon::String::upper()@Base" 7.0.0
>   (c++)"ucommon::String::upper(char*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=alpha sh4)"ucommon::String::vprintf(char const*, __va_list_tag)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=amd64 kfreebsd-amd64 powerpc powerpcspe s390x x32)"ucommon::String::vprintf(char const*, __va_list_tag*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=hurd-i386 i386 kfreebsd-i386 ppc64 ppc64el)"ucommon::String::vprintf(char const*, char*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=arm64 armel armhf)"ucommon::String::vprintf(char const*, std::__va_list)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=hppa m68k mips mips64el mipsel sparc64)"ucommon::String::vprintf(char const*, void*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=alpha sh4)"ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, __va_list_tag)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=amd64 kfreebsd-amd64 powerpc powerpcspe s390x x32)"ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, __va_list_tag*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=hurd-i386 i386 kfreebsd-i386 ppc64 ppc64el)"ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, char*)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=arm64 armel armhf)"ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, std::__va_list)@Base" 7.0.0
> - (c++|arch=hppa m68k mips mips64el mipsel sparc64)"ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, void*)@Base" 7.0.0
> + (c++|regex)"^ucommon::String::vprintf\(char const\*, (.+)\)@Base" 7.0.0
> + (c++|regex)"^ucommon::String::vscanf\(char const\*, (.+)\)@Base" 7.0.0
>   (c++)"ucommon::String::~String()@Base" 7.0.0
>   (c++|arch-bits=32)"ucommon::StringPager::StringPager(char**, unsigned int)@Base" 7.0.0
>   (c++|arch-bits=64)"ucommon::StringPager::StringPager(char**, unsigned long)@Base" 7.0.0

I am not sure if it's OK to loosen it up so much, because as I
understand it, then the changes from:

  ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, void*)

to, for example:

  ucommon::String::vscanf(char const*, int, char*)

would not be detected.


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>