Bug 1943070

Summary:	pacemaker: FTBFS with upcoming autoconf-2.71
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Ondrej Dubaj <odubaj>
Component:	pacemaker	Assignee:	Klaus Wenninger <kwenning>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	andrew, anprice, clumens, fedora, kwenning, lhh, tjyang2001
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	pacemaker-2.1.0-6.fc33; pacemaker-2.1.0-6.fc34; pacemaker-2.1.0-6.fc35	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-07-06 08:48:11 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1942967

Description Ondrej Dubaj 2021-03-25 12:50:06 UTC

Your package fails to build with the newest upcoming autoconf-2.71, which is part of a wide Fedora change. Please see the attached copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/odubaj/autoconf-2.70/packages/. More information about testing your package when building with autoconf available here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test

Comment 1 Ondrej Dubaj 2021-04-12 07:16:46 UTC

Gentle ping.

Comment 2 Klaus Wenninger 2021-04-12 11:51:57 UTC

(In reply to Ondrej Dubaj from comment #1)
> Gentle ping.

Sry that I didn't immediately come back to you.
The issues comes from a couple of ... foo() prototypes instead of ... foo(void).
I'm a bit surprised that autoconf adds this additional moaning ... but maybe just compiler flag defaults changing slightly.
Anyway the issue is cleaned up with upstream/master and we are about to start an upstream release-cycle within the next 2 weeks.
To make giving feedback on the release-candidates easier we usually are doing a fedora-release with each of the release-candidates.
Thus question is if you would be fine with a release that is compatible to autoconf-271 within the next 2 weeks.
If not I've just created a quick patch we could put on top of the current fedora release that I've just successfully tested building against your copr-repo.

Regards
Klaus

Comment 3 Ondrej Dubaj 2021-04-12 11:58:06 UTC

Release in two weeks is no problem for us, we are aiming autoconf-2.71 for f36, so we have plenty of time till then. Thanks for the clarification!