[tlbuild] [TeX-Live/texlive-source] Run failed: .github/workflows/main.yml - trunk (cda3622)

[Mojca Miklavec]

Hi,

Here's the link to the email that had a very detailed analysis of
glibc and kernel versions in different distributions:
    https://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2021-September/047409.html

but the interested part got deleted soon afterwards with this commit:
    https://github.com/xpack/xpack-build-box/commit/1883f8ea458a3c83e5eae0c520a4ef13614aa457

Just in case it helps with the decision about potential candidates for
the "most compatible distribution".

(Maybe there's an easy fix that gets the sources built on Debian 8
again, or maybe there's a straightforward way to install a newer
compiler to Debian 8. My only argument is that we don't necessarily
want to insist on using very old libraries just because of a single
ancient compiler that cannot handle it.)

Mojca

On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 at 06:36, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 at 02:21, Norbert Preining wrote:
> >
> > thanks for the harfbuzz update, but it seems it broke building, at least
> > on our CI tests:
> >
> > > Jobs:
> > >   * x86_64-linux build job failed (0 annotations)
> > >   * i386-linux build job failed (0 annotations)
> > >   * x86_64-linuxmusl build job failed (0 annotations)
> >
> > Some errors (there are more)
> >
> > ../../../libs/harfbuzz/harfbuzz-src/src/hb-open-type.hh:521:28: error: ‘is_trivially_copyable’ is not a member of ‘std’
>
> Initially I thought that perhaps HB switched to C++14 or 17 or 20, but
> this seems like a perfectly valid C++11 feature:
>     https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/is_trivially_copyable
>
> On our build farm the only builder that failed was Debian 8, while
> Debian 9 (and literally everything else) works as expected.
>
> Debian 8 is past the end of life already and even the extended long
> time support (I didn't even know that was a thing) ends immediately
> after the TL 2022 release. I don't really see any harm any longer in
> switching to Debian 9 (or another equivalent distribution; someone
> else was arguing for Ubuntu not that long ago).
>
> Mojca