5:30 p.m.
Commit fb01e1a44d missed including virutil.h, causing the following
compilation error
../../src/security/virt-aa-helper.c:1055:43: error: implicit declaration of
function 'virHostGetDRMRenderNode' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
1055 | char *defaultRenderNode = virHostGetDRMRenderNode();
Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com>
---
Pushing under the build-breaker rule.
src/security/virt-aa-helper.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c b/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
index 6f36652c7c..b6f58efdea 100644
--- a/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
+++ b/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
#include "virxml.h"
#include "viruuid.h"
#include "virusb.h"
+#include "virutil.h"
#include "virpci.h"
#include "virfile.h"
#include "configmake.h"
--
2.25.0
3:06 a.m.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:36 AM Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com> wrote:
Commit fb01e1a44d missed including virutil.h, causing the following
compilation error
../../src/security/virt-aa-helper.c:1055:43: error: implicit declaration of
function 'virHostGetDRMRenderNode' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
1055 | char *defaultRenderNode = virHostGetDRMRenderNode();
Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com>
---
Pushing under the build-breaker rule.
Thanks Jim,
it always built for me in all pre-tests which is odd.
Thanks for fixing it so fast!
src/security/virt-aa-helper.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c b/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
index 6f36652c7c..b6f58efdea 100644
--- a/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
+++ b/src/security/virt-aa-helper.c
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
#include "virxml.h"
#include "viruuid.h"
#include "virusb.h"
+#include "virutil.h"
#include "virpci.h"
#include "virfile.h"
#include "configmake.h"
--
2.25.0
--
Christian Ehrhardt
Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd
5:35 a.m.
On 2/25/20 10:06 AM, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:36 AM Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com
<mailto:jfehlig@suse.com>> wrote:
Commit fb01e1a44d missed including virutil.h, causing the following
compilation error
../../src/security/virt-aa-helper.c:1055:43: error: implicit
declaration of
function 'virHostGetDRMRenderNode'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
1055 | char *defaultRenderNode =
virHostGetDRMRenderNode();
Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com <mailto:jfehlig@suse.com>>
---
Pushing under the build-breaker rule.
Thanks Jim,
it always built for me in all pre-tests which is odd.
Thanks for fixing it so fast!
In fact I think the commit that caused the problem was a different one
(I blame the latest virutil.h include cleanup). The problem was that
some header files included virutil.h directly and thus aa-helper code
got it for free. After the include was removed, the helper needs to
include virtuil.h explicitly. I haven't look at which commit exactly
caused the problem. It doesn't really matter, does it?
Michal
9:34 a.m.
On 2/25/20 4:35 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 2/25/20 10:06 AM, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:36 AM Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com
> <mailto:jfehlig@suse.com>> wrote:
>
> Commit fb01e1a44d missed including virutil.h, causing the following
> compilation error
>
> ../../src/security/virt-aa-helper.c:1055:43: error: implicit
> declaration of
> function 'virHostGetDRMRenderNode'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 1055 | char *defaultRenderNode =
> virHostGetDRMRenderNode();
>
> Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com
<mailto:jfehlig@suse.com>>
> ---
>
> Pushing under the build-breaker rule.
>
>
> Thanks Jim,
> it always built for me in all pre-tests which is odd.
> Thanks for fixing it so fast!
In fact I think the commit that caused the problem was a different one (I blame
the latest virutil.h include cleanup). The problem was that some header files
included virutil.h directly and thus aa-helper code got it for free. After the
include was removed, the helper needs to include virtuil.h explicitly. I haven't
look at which commit exactly caused the problem. It doesn't really matter, does it?
Yep, I think you are right. It was likely commit b11e8ccc. But I also think you
are right in that it really doesn't matter at this point :-).
Regards,
Jim
1732
days inactive
1733
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Christian Ehrhardt -
Jim Fehlig -
Michal Privoznik