After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 762291 - Cerbero failed (once) to build gnutls with current MinGW
Cerbero failed (once) to build gnutls with current MinGW
Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE
Product: GStreamer
Classification: Platform
Component: cerbero
git master
Other Windows
: Normal minor
: NONE
Assigned To: GStreamer Maintainers
GStreamer Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2016-02-18 23:15 UTC by George Yunaev
Modified: 2016-04-24 23:45 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description George Yunaev 2016-02-18 23:15:38 UTC 
This is a weird bug since it did not happen after I repeated the build, so I would just keep it here in case someone else hits it and could reproduce it.

Basically Cerbero failed to compile gnutls and configure aborted with the following message:

checking whether <wchar.h> uses 'inline' correctly... no
configure: error: <wchar.h> cannot be used with this compiler.
This is a known interoperability problem of glibc <= 2.5 with gcc >= 4.3 in C99 mode. You have four options:
 - Add the flag -fgnu89-inline to CC and reconfigure, or
 - Fix your include files, using parts of
   <http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;=b037a293a48718af30d706c2e18c929d0e69a621>,
or
 - Use a gcc version older than 4.3, or
 - Don't use the flags -std=c99 or -std=gnu99.

I copied this message from https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2013-April/073108.html - the exact compiler flags were different, but did NOT include -std=c99 nor -std=gnu99.

After I deleted the windows_x86_64.cache file and restarted the build, everything was built correctly.
Comment 1 Tim-Philipp Müller 2016-04-24 23:45:55 UTC 
Thanks for the bug report, but I'm not quite sure what to do about this, especially seeing that you couldn't even reproduce it yourself (and judging from the error message it should be reproducable if the setup didn't change).

I think without more info we'll just have to close it and trust that if it's still an issue someone else will run into it again sooner or later and be able to reproduce it or even have a fix.