Description of problem:
While building transcode that make use of pvm, I have a link time error.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. build a componenet using pvm on ARM
/usr/bin/ld: /usr/share/pvm3/lib/LINUXARM/libpvm3.a(lpvmcat.o): relocation R_ARM_MOVW_ABS_NC against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
transcode currently build with on primary arches with pvm.
There is a need to ensure pvm is compiled with -fpic on ARM, even if only a static archive is made.
Currently pvm is built with -fPIC only for x86_64, is the most direct fix to add aarch64 to the conditional?
Thx for your answear.
I think aarch64 may be added too, but the bug I've experienced was with armv7hl.
I should manage to do a local test to commit anything.
I mean, test before to commit anything
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 20 development cycle.
Changing version to '20'.
More information and reason for this action is here:
I've tried to dig into this but failed to understand how I could apply the -fPIC CFLAGS to the arm build.
Do you have a patch I would test ? (even an arm-koji scratch build for f19) ?
Funny you update this bug right now. I'm attempting to rebuild transcode without PVM as PVM is no longer maintained and violates the packaging guidelines in very bad ways. I doubt many if any users are making use of this capability so my preference would be to retire PVM if not remove it.
Do you have a preference?
(In reply to Richard Shaw from comment #1)
> Currently pvm is built with -fPIC only for x86_64, is the most direct fix to
> add aarch64 to the conditional?
why only x86_64? Basically anything that uses generic build flags for -fPIC across all arches will be broken on anything not doing arch specific bits.
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Shaw from comment #1)
> > Currently pvm is built with -fPIC only for x86_64, is the most direct fix to
> > add aarch64 to the conditional?
> why only x86_64? Basically anything that uses generic build flags for -fPIC
> across all arches will be broken on anything not doing arch specific bits.
No clue. It is as inherited. My question is still, do we need/want PVM in Fedora? It's pretty much unmaintained as far as I can tell and the packaging build is horrendous. It copies everything to the buildroot and compiles in place.
> No clue. It is as inherited. My question is still, do we need/want PVM in
> Fedora? It's pretty much unmaintained as far as I can tell and the packaging
> build is horrendous. It copies everything to the buildroot and compiles in
Personally I don't think it makes sense to keep it then.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 20. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version'
Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version.
Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora 20 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.
Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 20 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-06-23. Fedora 20 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.
If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.