Bug 1191583

Summary: swig 3.0.3 and later breaks libgpod build
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson>
Component: libgpodAssignee: Bastien Nocera <bnocera>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: besser82, bnocera, cfergeau, chkr, jplesnik, moez.roy, nathaniel
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-02-12 13:12:55 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
Update comment in gpod.i.in none

Description Peter Robinson 2015-02-11 14:34:52 UTC 
Similar to this build any swig higher than 3.0.2 breaks the libgpod build

https://bugs.funtoo.org/browse/FL-1937

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8895024
Comment 1 Jitka Plesnikova 2015-02-12 08:12:01 UTC 
I am not swig expert, but it seems the problem is with using comment in gpod.i.in.

The comment below should be either remove or change to C comment. Otherwise it is handled by preprocessor as a macro, because it is not part of %pythoncode block.

# be nicer to decode these utf8 strings into Unicode objects in the C
# layer. Here we are leaving it to the Python side, and just giving
# them utf8 encoded Strings.

I created small patch and it fixed the build issue for me.
Comment 2 Jitka Plesnikova 2015-02-12 08:13:14 UTC 
Created attachment 990794 [details]
Update comment in gpod.i.in
Comment 3 Jitka Plesnikova 2015-02-12 08:24:53 UTC 
The issue was previously ignored, but now it is reported as error.

So, change the lines which start with # but which aren't preprocessor statements to not start with # - SWIG allows C++-style comments, so you can use // instead on those lines.
Comment 4 Peter Robinson 2015-02-12 13:12:55 UTC 
Thanks for the help, pushed