2018-05-13 12:05 GMT+02:00 Adrian Bunk <b...@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.montez...@gmail.com>
