Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:46:17 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: x11@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 265691] x11-servers/xorg-server: 21.1.4,1 undefined symbols Message-ID: <bug-265691-7141-Q3xgvNvxmL@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-265691-7141@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-265691-7141@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D265691 Peter Jeremy <peterj@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |peterj@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #13 from Peter Jeremy <peterj@FreeBSD.org> --- I've just run into the problem highlighted here but (as per comment 8 and later) on armv7 and the following relates to armv7. My initial comment: This bug was raised for arm64 and has fixed the issue there. Should the armv7 issue be raised as a different bug? Having looked at hw/xfree86/os-support/bsd/arm_video.c, my initial thought = was that Clang defines __arm__, whereas the arm_video.c code is testing for __arm32__ but manually defining __arm32__ means arm_video.c doesn't compile because ExtendedEnabled is undefined (it's "static" in hw/xfree86/os-support/bsd/i386_video.c and hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_video.c so this suggests that the code has = been cut-and-pasted without ever testing it). Looking more closely, arm_video.c provides two implementations of xf86EnableIO() and xf86DisableIO() - one uses /dev/io and the other uses /dev/ttyC0 - neither of which are present on either FreeBSD armv7 or arm64.= =20 Adding "or host_machine.cpu_family() =3D=3D 'arm'" to potch-include_meson.b= uild resulted in a functional xorg server for me. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-265691-7141-Q3xgvNvxmL>