[solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

ngoonee · 2009-09-28 04:47:49

I'm not really sure what these LDFLAGs below do, but the jack-rack package in the AUR could not compile with them on, works just fine otherwise. These are the new defaults with the recent pacman update.

LDFLAGS="-Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--as-needed"

Last edited by ngoonee (2009-09-28 06:20:32)

Nezmer · 2009-09-28 04:55:59

Just add LDFLAGS="" in the PKGBUILD . CFLAGS & MAKEFLAGS break some packages too . It's not something new .

Ranguvar · 2009-09-28 05:14:41

I'm a bit surprised at the Arch devs decision to use --as-needed, myself. While it provides the most benefits, it also is the most problematic (Gentoo has a metabug for all packages that --as-need breaks, BTW). -O1 and --sort-common are both much more reliable optimizations.

Overall, I'd recommend that the default be LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--hash-style=gnu". Yes, that's right, just one -Wl is needed if they are comma-separated.

Anyways, please don't use LDFLAGS="" or unset LDFLAGS, etc. in PKGBUILDs. A much more elegant solution would be to filter out --as-needed using sed or something.

Allan · 2009-09-28 05:49:01

Most --as-needed bugs are fixed these day as that flag is widely used (I believe Fedora, Ubuntu & Gentoo). The --as-needed flag is also awesome at reducing the number of rebuilds needed for a library soname bump, so fixing small numbers of cases where it does not work is preferable to me.
(Edit: also notice the nice patch used in our binutils package to fix many --as-needed issues...)

I actually did not think about --sort-common when talking about LDFLAGS and agree it would be useful. Feel free to file a bug report requesting it.

and, this is the line you want in your PKGBUILD.

  export LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS//-Wl,--as-needed}"

ngoonee · 2009-09-28 06:19:03

Thanks Allan, that works fine. Now to bug the maintainer of that package....

Beini · 2009-09-28 10:45:29

Stepmania fails to find lua with the new LDFLAGS:

*** liblua is required to build StepMania; please make sure that
*** it is installed to continue the installation process.

That can be fixed with the filter Allan posted, but I found this gentoo bug report:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170224

That mentions it being a bug in lua. I'm not really competent enough to say where's the problem, so should this be reported as lua bug or should it be just filtered out from the AUR package?

Ranguvar · 2009-09-28 21:36:27

Both, I say If the Gentoo bug says pretty conclusively that it's a bug, I would file upstream with Lua, and filter out as-needed in the meantime.

Last edited by Ranguvar (2009-09-28 21:37:02)

DonVla · 2010-01-14 12:36:16

Hi all,

I totally missed this thread!
I'm the maintainer of the jack-rack AUR package, and I got today a mail that it's not building properly.
However, I tried several times to build this package _without_ the "export LDFLAGS"-stuff and it built just fine. I added them to the PKGBUILD since some people seem to have this problem. But is this issue still up-to-date?

ngoonee · 2010-01-14 12:41:46

Most probably, on update, you have not fixed your /etc/makepkg.conf to follow the new LDFLAGs? The issue is still the same.

DonVla · 2010-01-15 12:48:34

ngoonee wrote:

Most probably, on update, you have not fixed your /etc/makepkg.conf to follow the new LDFLAGs? The issue is still the same.

No, I didn't.
I still have no LDFLAGS set in my makepkg.conf. But I haven't noticed no drawbacks. Everything, including jack-rack, compiles just fine.
Is it recommended to set them, or is there another reason to do so?

Vlad

ngoonee · 2010-01-16 13:07:52

Its set, as far as I know, so that the binary packages produced are smaller. Which is important when providing packages for the core, extra, community repos.

Thing is, the LDFLAGS which AREN'T set on your system ARE set on everyone else's. Because everyone else (which includes those using your package) updates pacman, sees a new /etc/makepkg.conf.pacnew, and replaces the old one.

For me, if you're maintaining an AUR package its best for your makepkg.conf to be vanilla except for optimizations, simply so you don't get these sort of problems.

DonVla · 2010-01-16 23:29:05

ngoonee wrote:

For me, if you're maintaining an AUR package its best for your makepkg.conf to be vanilla except for optimizations, simply so you don't get these sort of problems.

That´s a point.
Thanks

spijet · 2012-01-10 02:47:38

Hi All,
I got an error compiling jack-rack (as well as jack-rack-git) from AUR. It seems that it's again caused by new LDFLAGS.

gcc -pthread -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng14       -I/usr/include/alsa   -I/usr/include/libxml2   -DPKGDATADIR=\"/usr/share/jack-rack\" -DPIXMAPDIR=\"/usr/share/pixmaps\" -DDTDDIR=\"/usr/share/dtds\" -DG_DISABLE_DEPRECATED=1 -DGTK_DISABLE_DEPRECATED=1 -DGDK_DISABLE_DEPRECATED=1 -DGDK_PIXBUF_DISABLE_DEPRECATED=1 -DGNOME_DISABLE_DEPRECATED=1 -march=native -mcx16 -msahf -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector -fomit-frame-pointer --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -msse4.1 --param l1-cache-size=32 --param l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=3072 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -ljack   -pthread -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -latk-1.0 -lgio-2.0 -lpangoft2-1.0 -lpangocairo-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lcairo -lpango-1.0 -lfreetype -lfontconfig -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lrt -lglib-2.0     -llrdf -lasound   -lxml2   -Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--hash-style=gnu -o jack-rack jack_rack-midi_window.o jack_rack-midi_control.o jack_rack-wet_dry_controls.o jack_rack-file.o jack_rack-midi.o jack_rack-util.o jack_rack-plugin_settings.o jack_rack-process.o jack_rack-plugin_desc.o jack_rack-plugin_mgr.o jack_rack-ui.o jack_rack-plugin.o jack_rack-port_controls.o jack_rack-plugin_slot.o jack_rack-jack_rack.o jack_rack-lock_free_fifo.o jack_rack-ui_callbacks.o jack_rack-plugin_slot_callbacks.o jack_rack-control_callbacks.o jack_rack-main.o  
/usr/bin/ld: jack_rack-plugin_mgr.o: undefined reference to symbol 'dlclose@@GLIBC_2.2.5'
/usr/bin/ld: note: 'dlclose@@GLIBC_2.2.5' is defined in DSO /lib/libdl.so.2 so try adding it to the linker command line
/lib/libdl.so.2: could not read symbols: Invalid operation
collect2: выполнение ld завершилось с кодом возврата 1
make[2]: *** [jack-rack] Ошибка 1
make[2]: Выход из каталога `/tmp/yaourt-tmp-spijet/aur-jack-rack-git/src/jack-rack-build/src'
make[1]: *** [all] Ошибка 2
make[1]: Выход из каталога `/tmp/yaourt-tmp-spijet/aur-jack-rack-git/src/jack-rack-build/src'
make: *** [all-recursive] Ошибка 1

How do I fix it?

Sorry for bumping an old thread.

ngoonee · 2012-01-10 02:51:35

Bug the maintainer on the AUR page (or adjust the LDFLAGS yourself as indicated in this thread).

spijet · 2012-01-11 15:06:38

Thanks for answer, ngoonee, but setting LDFLAGS to "-Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--hash-style=gnu" didn't help, I still get the same error.
Already wrote DonVla about the problem.

falconindy · 2012-01-12 01:17:04

Build with LDFLAGS+=' -ljack'. The error is telling you that the buildsystem is trying to get away with transitive linking through some other library. That doesn't fly anymore (as of binutils 2.22). Your problem is unrelated to the OP.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-09-28 04:47:49

[solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#2 2009-09-28 04:55:59

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#3 2009-09-28 05:14:41

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#4 2009-09-28 05:49:01

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#5 2009-09-28 06:19:03

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#6 2009-09-28 10:45:29

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#7 2009-09-28 21:36:27

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#8 2010-01-14 12:36:16

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#9 2010-01-14 12:41:46

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#10 2010-01-15 12:48:34

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#11 2010-01-16 13:07:52

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#12 2010-01-16 23:29:05

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#13 2012-01-10 02:47:38

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#14 2012-01-10 02:51:35

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#15 2012-01-11 15:06:38

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

#16 2012-01-12 01:17:04

Re: [solved] New LDFLAGS default broke at least one AUR package for me

Board footer