[Bug 2046802] New: perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

            Bug ID: 2046802
           Summary: perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
            Status: NEW
         Component: perl
          Assignee: jplesnik(a)redhat.com
          Reporter: releng(a)fedoraproject.org
        QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
                CC: caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, iarnell(a)gmail.com,
                    jplesnik(a)redhat.com, kasal(a)ucw.cz,
                    mmaslano(a)redhat.com, mspacek(a)redhat.com,
                    perl-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, ppisar(a)redhat.com,
                    psabata(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com,
                    sandmann(a)redhat.com, spotrh(a)gmail.com
            Blocks: 1992484 (F36FTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora



perl failed to build from source in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=81984899


For details on the mass rebuild see:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild
Please fix perl at your earliest convenience and set the bug's status to
ASSIGNED when you start fixing it. If the bug remains in NEW state for 8 weeks,
perl will be orphaned. Before branching of Fedora 37,
perl will be retired, if it still fails to build.

For more details on the FTBFS policy, please visit:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fai...



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992484
[Bug 1992484] Fedora 36 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering <releng(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Created attachment 1856032
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1856032&action=edit
build.log

file build.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering <releng(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Created attachment 1856033
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1856033&action=edit
root.log

file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering <releng(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Created attachment 1856034
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1856034&action=edit
state.log


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; ---
The build failed only on ppc64le. 
I am working on it now.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Link ID|                            |Github
                   |                            |Perl/perl5/issues/19373




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #5 from Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; ---
The failure is related to failing test XS-APItest/t/printf.t which fails only
on ppc64le.

#   Failed test 'print_long_double'
#   at t/printf.t line 44.
#          got: '0.000'
#     expected: '7.000'
#   Failed test 'print_long_doubleL'
#   at t/printf.t line 45.
#          got: '0.000'
#     expected: '7.000'
# Looks like you failed 2 tests of 13.
../ext/XS-APItest/t/printf.t ......................................... 
Dubious, test returned 2 (wstat 512, 0x200)
Failed 2/13 subtests


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dhorak(a)redhat.com



--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com&gt; ---
From what I can see, perl likes to do everything on its own, so the printf that
the test uses is actually PerlIO_stdoutf.
Looking at config.h, the long double detection looks reasonable
#define HAS_LONG_DOUBLE         /**/
#ifdef HAS_LONG_DOUBLE
#define LONG_DOUBLESIZE 16              /**/
#define LONG_DOUBLEKIND 1               /**/
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_DOUBLE                           0
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_IEEE_754_128_BIT_LITTLE_ENDIAN   1
...
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_DOUBLEDOUBLE_128_BIT_LE_LE       5
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_DOUBLEDOUBLE_128_BIT_BE_BE       6
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_DOUBLEDOUBLE_128_BIT_LE_BE       7
#define LONG_DOUBLE_IS_DOUBLEDOUBLE_128_BIT_BE_LE       8
...
#define LONG_DOUBLE_STYLE_IEEE
#undef LONG_DOUBLE_STYLE_IEEE_DOUBLEDOUBLE
#undef LONG_DOUBLE_STYLE_IEEE_EXTENDED
#define LONG_DOUBLE_STYLE_IEEE_STD
#undef LONG_DOUBLE_STYLE_VAX
#endif
but the question is what it does with it.  I'm not familiar with the perl
codebase and it is unfortunately
quite cryptic.
Is there an easy way to run a single test as opposed to all of them?
Actually:
#ifndef USE_LONG_DOUBLE
/*#define       USE_LONG_DOUBLE         / **/
#endif
looks kind of unexpected.
I bet that is also the reason why
#define Gconvert(x,n,t,b) sprintf((b),"%.*g",(n),(x))
and not
#define Gconvert(x,n,t,b) sprintf((b),"%.*Lg",(n),(x))

I'd suggest to compare emitted config.h between s390x and ppc64le, s390x also
(like rawhide ppc64le) has IEEE quad long double (though, it has big-endian one
while ppc64le little endian).
And also compare it with f35-ish ppc64le (which had IBM double double instead
of IEEE quad long double).


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|dhorak(a)redhat.com           |dan(a)danny.cz
             Blocks|                            |1071880 (PPCTracker)





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1071880
[Bug 1071880] (PPCTracker) Fedora for PowerPC architectures (ppc64,ppc64le):
Bug Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #7 from Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; ---
I temporarily turned off running those two test cases for ppc64le to be able to
build perl.

perl-5.34.0-484.fc36 has been successfully built.

I will continue to look for the cause of the error.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802



--- Comment #8 from Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz&gt; ---
If you need access to a rawhide/ppc64le machine, please let me know.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom(a)ascii.art.br&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tuliom(a)ascii.art.br



--- Comment #9 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom(a)ascii.art.br&gt; ---
I can't reproduce this issue with gcc-12.0.1-0.6.fc36. I tested with commit
a471b953f462f, which doesn't disable the 2 test cases.

I suspect this issue has been fixed by bug 2050569.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

[Bug 2046802] perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802

Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|                            |perl-5.34.0-485.fc36
         Resolution|---                         |RAWHIDE
        Last Closed|                            |2022-02-07 15:42:16



--- Comment #10 from Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik(a)redhat.com&gt; ---

Thanks for the notice, Tulio. I removed the previous changes and successfully
rebuilt perl.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046802