summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/results/classifier/zero-shot/118/none/1793183
blob: f894201bfe70043892677b66523a37befe2a4ed9 (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
permissions: 0.776
register: 0.773
peripherals: 0.772
graphic: 0.770
arm: 0.741
performance: 0.712
architecture: 0.708
device: 0.697
debug: 0.694
semantic: 0.657
virtual: 0.641
hypervisor: 0.635
socket: 0.633
assembly: 0.633
PID: 0.623
ppc: 0.618
files: 0.606
TCG: 0.603
boot: 0.603
x86: 0.591
KVM: 0.575
network: 0.561
kernel: 0.536
user-level: 0.481
vnc: 0.470
VMM: 0.435
risc-v: 0.430
i386: 0.358
mistranslation: 0.353

apt source --compile qemu-system-x86 fails on last ubuntu 18.04.1

Error log:

/tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/util/memfd.c:40:12: error: static declaration of ‘memfd_create’ follows non-static declaration
 static int memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags)
            ^~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman-linux.h:115:0,
                 from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman.h:45,
                 from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/mman.h:41,
                 from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/include/sysemu/os-posix.h:29,
                 from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/include/qemu/osdep.h:104,
                 from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/util/memfd.c:28:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman-shared.h:46:5: note: previous declaration of ‘memfd_create’ was here
 int memfd_create (const char *__name, unsigned int __flags) __THROW;
     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
/tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/rules.mak:66: recipe for target 'util/memfd.o' failed
make[1]: *** [util/memfd.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/qemu-build'
debian/rules:121: recipe for target 'build-stamp' failed
make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build subprocess returned exit status 2



The attachment "fix-memfd-conflict.patch" seems to be a patch.  If it isn't, please remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the "patch" tag, and if you are a member of the ~ubuntu-reviewers, unsubscribe the team.

[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by ~brian-murray, for any issues please contact him.]

On 18 September 2018 at 10:24, Dmitry Isaykin <email address hidden> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Error log:
>
> /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/util/memfd.c:40:12: error: static declaration of ‘memfd_create’ follows non-static declaration
>  static int memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags)
>             ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman-linux.h:115:0,
>                  from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman.h:45,
>                  from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/mman.h:41,
>                  from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/include/sysemu/os-posix.h:29,
>                  from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/include/qemu/osdep.h:104,
>                  from /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/util/memfd.c:28:
> /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman-shared.h:46:5: note: previous declaration of ‘memfd_create’ was here
>  int memfd_create (const char *__name, unsigned int __flags) __THROW;
>      ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> /tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/rules.mak:66: recipe for target 'util/memfd.o' failed

This is fixed in upstream QEMU in commit 75e5b70e6b5dcc, which is in
QEMU 2.12.0. If Ubuntu are interested in fixing this they can backport
that to the QEMU they are shipping, or alternatively move forward to 2.12.

thanks
-- PMM


This was already fixed in bionic's 1:2.11+dfsg-1ubuntu4, and the current version of the package in bionic is 1:2.11+dfsg-1ubuntu7.5.

I just tried a build in bionic and it finished just fine.

Looking at the tmp directory of your build, you seem to be using an older version:
/tmp/qemu-2.10+dfsg/util/memfd.c:40:12: error: static......

I will therefore mark this bug as invalid. If you believe that to be a mistake, please reopen it with further information.

Thanks!