From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60569) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dPOuK-0007Zd-Td for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 03:58:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dPOuH-0005vo-T4 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 03:58:04 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35245) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dPOuH-0005vg-P5 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 03:58:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPOuH-0003Mg-J6 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 03:58:01 -0400 Subject: [bug#27471] [PATCH] gnu: wine: Update to 2.11. Resent-Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 03:57:44 -0400 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: <20170626075744.GA10473@jasmine.lan> References: <20170624183704.GB8908@jasmine.lan> <2dca0f9ec4b2b2ad6a08fb58435efc38@mykolab.com> <87fuen9oan.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87fuen9oan.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 27471@debbugs.gnu.org, Rutger Helling --h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 09:54:40AM +0200, Ludovic Court=E8s wrote: > Rutger Helling skribis: >=20 > > Never mind, I'm hitting this failure as well. It only happens on the > > regular 32-bit build though (wine), the 64-bit version builds fine > > (wine64).=20 > > > > I think it's something related to the i686-linux version of glibc@2.25. > > Probably has to do with a recent glibc related commit as well since it > > built fine before.=20 >=20 > Could it be that the post-stack-clash glibc fails to build on i686? Yes, but Mark fixed it in ffc015bea26f24d862e7e877d907fbe1ab9a9967 It was discussed here: --h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAllQvnUACgkQJkb6MLrK fwj5bhAA7b8swpii410sZIMUVycelpKV1AKs4rFn7fN8NNi0DARGMiLXLYxN/IWy b2TPaM+ABY6SDkzxnFiOnqzkOT+zlQ6WCSMvx7MAaVNJxjJXUKRBlddXRfDlwYxO IGnTp/M8MhSizJ34+zzqrq1spEJLLqo/1X7fNMwcgkwkDg0ex2enVqPUe+GF2Qee z7ksX+yYZcr5Hilj/+jK2RKLlOlKjqiB1Yvs5W6++bje+P0fR2s+X9FTpgbqsyYY egT8n6/PmycU6DIZwThpPjStSFRjprkR/qbnZSB9w2GtdrjIbYMNOs0VATACPQnJ cuRnTEQbwPeErch1dqSnDDgWV1SpoxpAn/5Si4vJrVWW/JjI1ivcMmz1ChoWL7le wHgzf3/gCHIz3+Bt0nt6j7YGESkYQ9T/q//UkQxZJ6oXvdVi+Ca6zYDHHUvkLs0H PWS7OnaJvQHdUr3mbwc3cehPXZ1ihst0C9M7onYzhSMfT5ChOvalW5sBK6yq92eL PhtfmWk9ewIiLrj7IB5hHtOXnJlY4cn7tWoJkM7589q7G9a8RFgxi0qpH03+NZzt gJ9ekI4MKlPGPNiTnrZYgSphjUGdIrURSdlkkL3JBnqyHG19I6Q2iU+EmB310JZK R/khO5FIu8jk+ANnLN/1Zw7LA6PJcX1Exu+LI9w/8xqdCQh7FYM= =/d5D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF--