FTBFS in mock but not a real EL5 system

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Wed Jan 11 03:49:38 UTC 2012

On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:40:43 -0700
"T.C. Hollingsworth" <tchollingsworth at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all!
> Node.js upstream recently switched from hardcoding LINUX_VERSION_CODE
> to checking that __NR_accept4 is defined when checking that the
> "accept4" syscall is available. (see patch here [1])
> This breaks building for EL5 in mock on F16 (see log tail here [2]),
> but not on a real CentOS 5 system.  A quick grep of
> $MOCK_ROOT/usr/include indicates that __NR_accept4 isn't defined, as
> it should be, so I'm not sure what's going wrong here, or if it's a
> problem in mock or upstream.

Well, if something fails in mock, but works on a real system it sounds
like missing BuildRequires. Perhaps kernel-headers? 

In any case, not sure what this has to do with EPEL... we don't ship
Node.js. ;) 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20120110/8adfedcc/attachment.sig>

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list