commit: e186a1a13c102f41d68651ed24425fb648a518a9 Author: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam <AT> gentoo <DOT> org> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 14 06:44:30 2025 +0000 Commit: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam <AT> gentoo <DOT> org> CommitDate: Tue Oct 14 06:49:12 2025 +0000 URL: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=e186a1a1
dev-lang/nasm: fix building on musl Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/964191 Signed-off-by: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam <AT> gentoo.org> dev-lang/nasm/files/nasm-3.01-musl.patch | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ dev-lang/nasm/nasm-3.01.ebuild | 4 ++ 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+) diff --git a/dev-lang/nasm/files/nasm-3.01-musl.patch b/dev-lang/nasm/files/nasm-3.01-musl.patch new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..20efe150b078 --- /dev/null +++ b/dev-lang/nasm/files/nasm-3.01-musl.patch @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +https://github.com/netwide-assembler/nasm/commit/44e89ba9b650b5e1533bca43682e167f51a3511f +From: "H. Peter Anvin (Intel)" <[email protected]> +Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 12:48:32 -0700 +Subject: [PATCH] compiler.h: drop the stupid C++-style cast-to-bool hack + +The C++-style cast-to-bool hack was broken in concept that it doesn't help the +fundamental problem -- implicit conversions are broken for the +backwards compatibility enum definition -- as well as in +implementation, as it misspelled __STDC_VERSION__ as __STDC_VERSION. + +The #ifdef bool test *should* have prevented this problem, but +apparently several compilers do define "bool" in <stdbool.h> even when +it is a keyword, in violation of the C23 spec. + +Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin (Intel) <[email protected]> +--- a/include/compiler.h ++++ b/include/compiler.h +@@ -181,19 +181,10 @@ size_t strlcpy(char *, const char *, size_t); + char * pure_func strrchrnul(const char *, int); + #endif + +-#if !defined(__cplusplus) || (__STDC_VERSION >= 202311L) + /* C++ and C23 have bool, false, and true as proper keywords */ ++#if !defined(__cplusplus) || (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 202311L) + # ifdef HAVE_STDBOOL_H +-/* If <stdbool.h> exists, include it explicitly to prevent it from +- begin included later, causing the "bool" macro to be defined. */ + # include <stdbool.h> +-# ifdef bool +-/* Force bool to be a typedef instead of a macro. What a "clever" hack +- this is... */ +- typedef bool /* The macro definition of bool */ +-# undef bool +- bool; /* No longer the macro definition */ +-# endif + # elif defined(HAVE___BOOL) + typedef _Bool bool; + # define false 0 +@@ -201,14 +192,10 @@ char * pure_func strrchrnul(const char *, int); + # else + /* This is a bit dangerous, because casting to this ersatz bool + will not produce the same result as the standard (bool) cast. +- Instead, use the bool() constructor-style macro defined below. */ ++ Instead, use the explicit construct !!x instead of relying on ++ implicit conversions or casts. */ + typedef enum bool { false, true } bool; + # endif +-/* This amounts to a C++-style conversion cast to bool. This works +- because C ignores an argument-taking macro when used without an +- argument and because bool was redefined as a typedef if it previously +- was defined as a macro (see above.) */ +-# define bool(x) ((bool)!!(x)) + #endif + + /* Create a NULL pointer of the same type as the address of +@@ -321,11 +308,11 @@ static inline void *mempset(void *dst, int c, size_t n) + * less likely to be taken. + */ + #ifdef HAVE___BUILTIN_EXPECT +-# define likely(x) __builtin_expect(bool(x), true) +-# define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(bool(x), false) ++# define likely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), true) ++# define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), false) + #else +-# define likely(x) bool(x) +-# define unlikely(x) bool(x) ++# define likely(x) (!!(x)) ++# define unlikely(x) (!!(x)) + #endif + + #ifdef HAVE___BUILTIN_PREFETCH + +https://github.com/netwide-assembler/nasm/commit/746e7c9efa37cec9a44d84a1e96b8c38f385cc1f +From: "H. Peter Anvin (Intel)" <[email protected]> +Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 13:05:55 -0700 +Subject: [PATCH] compiler.h: the test for "neither C++ nor C23" still wrong + +The test needs to test for neither nor; as it was it tested "(not C++) +or C23" which was not at all what was intended... + +Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin (Intel) <[email protected]> +--- a/include/compiler.h ++++ b/include/compiler.h +@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ char * pure_func strrchrnul(const char *, int); + #endif + + /* C++ and C23 have bool, false, and true as proper keywords */ +-#if !defined(__cplusplus) || (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 202311L) ++#if !defined(__cplusplus) && (__STDC_VERSION__ < 202311L) + # ifdef HAVE_STDBOOL_H + # include <stdbool.h> + # elif defined(HAVE___BOOL) diff --git a/dev-lang/nasm/nasm-3.01.ebuild b/dev-lang/nasm/nasm-3.01.ebuild index e15966772d42..58eb4f46d243 100644 --- a/dev-lang/nasm/nasm-3.01.ebuild +++ b/dev-lang/nasm/nasm-3.01.ebuild @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ QA_CONFIG_IMPL_DECL_SKIP=( __bswap_16 __bswap_32 __bswap_64 + + # has fallback code to handle this missing on musl + stdc_leading_zeros ) # [fonts note] doc/psfonts.ph defines ordered list of font preference. @@ -60,6 +63,7 @@ BDEPEND=" PATCHES=( "${FILESDIR}"/${PN}-2.15-bsd-cp-doc.patch + "${FILESDIR}"/${P}-musl.patch # merged upstream ) src_prepare() {
