On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 10:09, Ryan Harkin <ryan.harkin@linaro.org> wrote:

> Hi Khem,
>
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2020, 21:58 Khem Raj, <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:35 AM Ryan Harkin <ryan.harkin@linaro.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'm migrating from Warrior to Dunfell and I'm getting a curious build
>> failure in gcc-sanitizers.
>> >
>> > Here's the full gory detail:
>> >     https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/nh4cDKMvgS/
>> >
>> > However, the main error is this:
>> >
>> > | In file included from
>> ../../../../../../../../../work-shared/gcc-arm-8.3-r2019.03/git/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:193:
>> > |
>> ../../../../../../../../../work-shared/gcc-arm-8.3-r2019.03/git/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h:317:72:
>> error: size of array 'assertion_failed__1152' is negative
>> > |      typedef char IMPL_PASTE(assertion_failed_##_,
>> line)[2*(int)(pred)-1]
>> >
>> > I have no idea where to begin with this. I don't even know why
>> gcc-sanitizers is included in the build, what it does, or why I need it.
>> I'm building an image with dev packages and gcc, so I guess that's why.
>> >
>> > I've hacked meta-arm to patch sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc to
>> null out the macros and that builds fine. I'm sure it won't work, should
>> someone want to use it, mind you.
>> >
>> > Is there something obvious that I should be doing as part of a Warrior
>> -> Dunfell migration to get this to work?
>> >
>> > note: Warrior used meta-linaro-toolchain and for Dunfell, it's moved to
>> meta-arm-toolchain.
>> >
>>
>> is gcc 8.3 the latest for linaro
>>
>
> I assume so. I haven't attempted to change the default.
>

I'm sorry, that's incorrect: local.conf has an over-ride to specify 8.3.
I've just removed it and now it's using 9.3. And it's building fine.

Sumit, do you know if there's a reason for using 9.2 in RPB instead of 9.3?


>
>> > Regards,
>> > Ryan.
>> > 
>>
>