Bug#1142021: marked as done (libffi: FTBFS on ppc64el: symbols for complex numbers not in symbols file)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_1784037422-2174242-0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Your message dated Tue, 14 Jul 2026 14:55:04 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1142021: libffi: FTBFS on ppc64el: symbols for com=
plex numbers not in symbols file
has caused the Debian Bug report #1142021,
regarding libffi: FTBFS on ppc64el: symbols for complex numbers not in symb=
ols file
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


--=20
1142021: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D1142021
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems

------------=_1784037422-2174242-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jul 2026 22:22:23 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.2 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
	DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,
	FROMDEVELOPER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 15; hammy, 150; neutral, 93; spammy,
	0. spammytokens:
	hammytokens:0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:stravin,
	0.000-+--H*RT:sk:stravin, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:311,
	0.000-+--H*RT:311, 0.000-+--H*RT:108
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from stravinsky.debian.org ([2001:41b8:202:deb::311:108]:58888)
	by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wjP2d-007FEA-1z
	for [email protected];
	Mon, 13 Jul 2026 22:22:23 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debian.org;
	s=smtpauto.stravinsky; h=X-Debian-User:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:
	Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:
	Content-Description:In-Reply-To:References;
	bh=t5DNHlo2aaTyV9FvNFwhCTgBrIMzW3XHinPX0SEr5kI=; b=cCK5QwOwPvktfGZZUkQk79aCAo
	Pot8r8Frh+gIbHT6XeRpj6wFHy90BZ3ERdgK49G4qMLeCRjekr6sfPS18jrrA4hVXqrdn9oNXRdcV
	I+Pp1qVXztUOOp4Pj1RB+xVlf0sO44E7YO7aZva8DDaY+HVWOU/lrH4KGtOKViEvLe0IlDOVP99Jp
	gCb+PsIsd8ecK1RdCAUq8dEFMxMlQWnwborlflQMBo+nBEAVHb+60WtnwZ/RM7tdBWKPCgeOJk3Fe
	Et6m0Hv5JGDemYiDqZNoqcqntTC/XD+AxI714oE5WV87NfG8lYVThpPzRk+Zx9yzKGZYgF5kWjpB0
	r2+Zmu6Q==;
Received: from authenticated-user
	by stravinsky.debian.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wjP2c-001oz8-0J
	for [email protected];
	Mon, 13 Jul 2026 22:22:22 +0000
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 23:22:20 +0100
From: Simon McVittie <[email protected]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[email protected]>
Subject: libffi: FTBFS on ppc64el: symbols for complex numbers not in symbols
 file
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Debian-User: smcv
Delivered-To: [email protected]

Source: libffi
Version: 3.7.1-1
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected]
User: [email protected]
Usertags: ppc64el

The recent libffi upload didn't build successfully on ppc64el, with 
symptoms not matching the other FTBFS bug I reported today. From the 
buildd log 
<https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libffi&arch=ppc64el&ver=3.7.1-1&stamp=1783944229&raw=0>:

--- debian/libffi8.symbols (libffi8_3.7.1-1_ppc64el)
+++ dpkg-gensymbolsjufNPp	2026-07-13 12:03:47.533467105 +0000
@@ -4,5 +4,9 @@
  (symver)LIBFFI_CALL_PLAN_8.4 3.7
  (symver)LIBFFI_CLOSURE_8.0 3.4
  (symver|arch=!arc !hppa !ia64 !m68k !loong64 !any-mips !any-mipsel !any-mips64 !nios2 !powerpc !ppc64 !ppc64el !riscv64 !sh4)LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 3.4
+ LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0@LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 3.7.1-1
  (symver|arch=!arc !hppa !ia64 !m68k !nios2 !sh4)LIBFFI_GO_CLOSURE_8.0 3.4
- (symver)LIBFFI_INT128_8.3 3.7
+#MISSING: 3.7.1-1# (symver)LIBFFI_INT128_8.3 3.7
+ ffi_type_complex_double@LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 3.7.1-1
+ ffi_type_complex_float@LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 3.7.1-1
+ ffi_type_complex_longdouble@LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 3.7.1-1

In addition to the LIBFFI_INT128_8.3 symver not being present as 
expected (same as in the other FTBFS bug report), it seems that the 
LIBFFI_COMPLEX_8.0 symver has been added, on this architecture only.

Perhaps ppc64el gained a feature in this release that was previously 
only supported on a few architectures like x86 and ARM? If so, removing 
ppc64el (and possibly other architectures) from the negative 
architecture list might solve this.

buildd logs for big-endian powerpc and ppc64 don't seem to be available, 
so I can't tell whether those -ports architectures have the same failure 
mode.

Thanks,
    smcv

------------=_1784037422-2174242-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Received: (at 1142021-done) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Jul 2026 13:55:08 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.2 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
	DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,
	FROMDEVELOPER,HAS_BUG_NUMBER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST,VERSION autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 14; hammy, 90; neutral, 16; spammy, 0.
	spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:stravin,
	0.000-+--H*RT:sk:stravin, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:311,
	0.000-+--H*RT:311, 0.000-+--H*RT:108
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from stravinsky.debian.org ([2001:41b8:202:deb::311:108]:54286)
	by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wjdbI-0097RJ-1x
	for [email protected];
	Tue, 14 Jul 2026 13:55:08 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debian.org;
	s=smtpauto.stravinsky; h=X-Debian-User:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:
	References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Cc:
	Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description;
	bh=P9FfebbPO/n24K0ESR/oevcHKPbYJi6MdiIClElimyg=; b=CReHl1mgBJpfdG0Ah7JbBiCSxX
	jHKr3bLTsteAsEe5oZMyEKHkjjLM9KMC5V7CF38uoHLCYDrmSLVqf2FbCb4vgpIoW4exU/f/LY5GI
	L7UCdpokD0rakvSPU+HcZWOksEVoVQNJdXeYFqQWKuHLzDlvSxZKtGj81pGtwcVFIQR0e1h00cYXf
	6Zi3h8n3uwCUKn5WWtTlR+s98jfLD/uqf8eCpnl+5sZ7aqUXsDHCOQpEXOxJtpCqjtv+Ssqaw+Nae
	hKh7XpRil/XuGRVdXhQ8J4AVCgS9dHSpwY1wzHtQi43M6OQc4mff7vtErDR7SlzrrL82Bx5zHutxT
	QLICHRag==;
Received: from authenticated-user
	by stravinsky.debian.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wjdbG-002K6Y-2L
	for [email protected];
	Tue, 14 Jul 2026 13:55:07 +0000
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 14:55:04 +0100
From: Simon McVittie <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bug#1142021: libffi: FTBFS on ppc64el: symbols for complex
 numbers not in symbols file
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
X-Debian-User: smcv

Version: 3.7.1-2

On Mon, 13 Jul 2026 at 23:22:20 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
>The recent libffi upload didn't build successfully on ppc64el

Appears to have been fixed by:

libffi (3.7.1-2) unstable; urgency=medium

   * Conditionalize new symbols on architectures.
------------=_1784037422-2174242-0--