Opened 10 years ago

Last modified 3 years ago

#43591 assigned defect

binutils conflicts with gdb

Reported by: cceleri@… Owned by:
Priority: Normal Milestone:
Component: ports Version: 2.2.1
Keywords: Cc: cooljeanius (Eric Gallager), maehne (Torsten Maehne), MarinosK (Marinos Koutsomichalis), akimd (Akim Demaille), lloda@…
Port: binutils gdb

Description

Hi,

I installed the gdb port a few days ago and just tried to install the binutils port. Unfortunately, I get the following error:

$ sudo port install binutils
Password:
--->  Computing dependencies for binutils
--->  Fetching archive for binutils
--->  Attempting to fetch binutils-2.24_0.darwin_13.x86_64.tbz2 from http://mse.uk.packages.macports.org/sites/packages.macports.org/binutils
--->  Attempting to fetch binutils-2.24_0.darwin_13.x86_64.tbz2.rmd160 from http://mse.uk.packages.macports.org/sites/packages.macports.org/binutils
--->  Installing binutils @2.24_0
--->  Activating binutils @2.24_0
Error: org.macports.activate for port binutils returned: Image error: /opt/local/include/ansidecl.h is being used by the active gdb port.  Please deactivate this port first, or use 'port -f activate binutils' to force the activation.
Please see the log file for port binutils for details:
    /opt/local/var/macports/logs/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_tarballs_ports_devel_binutils/binutils/main.log
To report a bug, follow the instructions in the guide:
    http://guide.macports.org/#project.tickets
Error: Processing of port binutils failed

I'm not sure if this is a binutils problem or not, but I would like to activate both gdb and binutils if possible.

Change History (14)

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)

Owner: changed from macports-tickets@… to dweber@…
Port: gdb added
Summary: Activating binutils conflicts with activated gdbbinutils conflicts with gdb

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)

This is because binutils and gdb are both built from source trees that are so similar that they are basically the same. The upstream repository actually combines their names and is just called "binutils-gdb". I have local copies of the binutils and gdb Portfiles in my own local Portfile repo that I had to modify heavily to keep them from conflicting, but I think a better approach for trunk would be to combine them into a single port, or to make one a sub-port of the other.

comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)

Cc: egall@… added

Cc Me!

comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by maehne (Torsten Maehne)

Cc: Torsten.Maehne@… added

Cc Me!

comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)

While solving this conflict, we should probably also solve some of the conflicts with the cross-gdb ports, such as #39917 and #43098

Also, this is not the exact same conflict, but the issue of gdb running into conflicts has come up recently on the upstream gdb-patches mailing lists: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-07/msg00007.html

comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)

Owner: changed from dweber@… to macports-tickets@…

dweber has retired. See #43834.

comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)

Owner: changed from macports-tickets@… to stuartwesterman@…

comment:8 in reply to:  2 ; Changed 9 years ago by stuartwesterman (Stuart Westerman)

Replying to egall@…:

This is because binutils and gdb are both built from source trees that are so similar that they are basically the same. The upstream repository actually combines their names and is just called "binutils-gdb". I have local copies of the binutils and gdb Portfiles in my own local Portfile repo that I had to modify heavily to keep them from conflicting, but I think a better approach for trunk would be to combine them into a single port, or to make one a sub-port of the other.

Yes, can we please do one of these two options?

comment:9 Changed 9 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)

Cc: marinos@… added

Has duplicate #48426.

comment:10 Changed 8 years ago by akimd (Akim Demaille)

Cc: akim.demaille@… added

Cc Me!

comment:11 Changed 8 years ago by reubano (Reuben Cummings)

Same issue!

comment:12 Changed 8 years ago by lloda@…

Cc: lloda@… added

Cc Me!

comment:13 Changed 7 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)

Owner: stuartwesterman deleted
Status: newassigned

comment:14 in reply to:  8 Changed 3 years ago by cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)

Replying to stuartwesterman:

Replying to egall@…:

This is because binutils and gdb are both built from source trees that are so similar that they are basically the same. The upstream repository actually combines their names and is just called "binutils-gdb". I have local copies of the binutils and gdb Portfiles in my own local Portfile repo that I had to modify heavily to keep them from conflicting, but I think a better approach for trunk would be to combine them into a single port, or to make one a sub-port of the other.

Yes, can we please do one of these two options?

Given that neither of these have happened in the last 7 years, I'm thinking it might be easier just to mark the conflict for now...

Also, for reference, here are links to my copies of the binutils and gdb Portfiles, if anyone wants to pick up my changes; they have TODOs and FIXMEs left to do in them, though:

Last edited 3 years ago by cooljeanius (Eric Gallager) (previous) (diff)
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.