Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 16, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@theopolis
Copy link
Contributor

All Submissions:

  • Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
  • Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?

@DomT4
Copy link
Contributor

DomT4 commented Mar 23, 2016

Failed to build on all three platforms, which is interesting because #50132 didn't fail a few days ago. Hmm. Thoughts on that @theopolis & @ilovezfs?

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@DomT4 @theopolis This is why #50132 includes cpp-netlib 0.12.0-rc1 as well. Also, 1.7.2 is pre-release for 1.8.0, which is why #50132 has it in devel. Cf. osquery/osquery#1920 as noted in the commit message of #50132

@DomT4 Hence, #50132 (comment)

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@theopolis Is 1.7.2 correct for Homebrew :stable despite the note at https://github.com/facebook/osquery/releases? I don't personally object to moving it to :stable but wasn't sure based on that note.

@theopolis
Copy link
Contributor Author

You can mark it :stable, I keep pre-release for a 24/48 hour period while I deploy and test on a larger scale than 3 build hosts. :) I will update that note and remove the checkbox later tonight, as well as fill in the release notes.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@theopolis Thanks! I'll close #50132 in favor of this PR and one just bumping cpp-netlib.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@DomT4 @theopolis if #50375 is merged first and then CI retriggered here, this should pass.

@tdsmith
Copy link
Contributor

tdsmith commented Mar 24, 2016

It would be unusual for us to land a -rc version (of cpp-netlib) in stable. The last netlib candidate was tagged about two weeks ago. Can you ask them if they're ready to release?

@DomT4
Copy link
Contributor

DomT4 commented Mar 24, 2016

👍 on Tim's comment.

@theopolis
Copy link
Contributor Author

A non RC release is a question for @deanberris. From the OS X client perspective I've tested on 10 thousand+ machines and everything is working ok. Also keep in mind, in Homebrew osquery is the only forward dependency.

Alternatively, @ilovezfs, can you mark 1.7.2 as dependent on the :devel cpp-netlib? If it seems there's blockage we can forgo adding 1.7.2 for now.

@DomT4
Copy link
Contributor

DomT4 commented Mar 24, 2016

Alternatively, @ilovezfs, can you mark 1.7.2 as dependent on the :devel cpp-netlib?

At present we don't support mandating people install devel or HEAD versions of a dependency.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@DomT4 Unless you want to merge 0.12.0-rc1 as stable (which would be my recommendation, whence the PR), maybe 0.12.0-rc1 should be vendored into this formula?

@DomT4
Copy link
Contributor

DomT4 commented Mar 24, 2016

It'd be nice to at least ask upstream if they're ready to go stable yet before we start jumping around alternatives.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

Upstream has responded:

Hi -- The only showstoppers are documentation updates. As its the Easter long weekend here down under, I intend to get back to the documentation updates around Wednesday. Hopefully by end of the week we'll have a 0.12.0-rc2 that will be -final after another round of testing.

Does that work?

(https://groups.google.com/d/msg/cpp-netlib/wKwJ2vZUXjs/2usy51VhCAAJ)

@DomT4 @tdsmith So sounds like merging #50375 as stable should be fine for the time being, no?

@theopolis
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ilovezfs I may have an alternative. Technically osquery is API compatible with 0.11 but CMake expects 0.12, thankfully without forcing an exception otherwise. If we add the correct linker flags in the brew formula we can build 1.7.2+ with 0.11. Give me a few to play around with the build.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

@theopolis Cool, thanks

@tdsmith
Copy link
Contributor

tdsmith commented Mar 27, 2016

@ilovezfs That sounds like a reason to wait for a release to me :) Sorry to be a stick in the mud; glad there's a workaround to try.

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

RC2 which will then become final is now in the works here: cpp-netlib/cpp-netlib#622

@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

#50375 updated with 0.12.0-rc2

@theopolis theopolis closed this Mar 31, 2016
@ilovezfs
Copy link
Contributor

I'm sure this is already known to @theopolis but same issue for 1.7.3

==> cmake . -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFI
==> make
Last 15 lines from /Users/joe/Library/Logs/Homebrew/osquery/05.make:
      boost::detail::thread_data_base::thread_data_base() in libosquery_additional.a(tls.cpp.o)
  NOTE: a missing vtable usually means the first non-inline virtual member function has no definition.
  "boost::thread::join_noexcept()", referenced from:
      boost::network::http::impl::async_client<boost::network::http::tags::http_async_8bit_udp_resolve, 1u, 1u>::wait_complete() in libosquery_additional.a(tls.cpp.o)
  "boost::thread::start_thread_noexcept()", referenced from:
      boost::thread::start_thread() in libosquery_additional.a(tls.cpp.o)
  "boost::thread::detach()", referenced from:
      boost::thread::~thread() in libosquery_additional.a(tls.cpp.o)
  "boost::thread::native_handle()", referenced from:
      boost::network::http::impl::async_client<boost::network::http::tags::http_async_8bit_udp_resolve, 1u, 1u>::wait_complete() in libosquery_additional.a(tls.cpp.o)
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
make[2]: *** [osquery/osqueryi] Error 1
make[1]: *** [osquery/CMakeFiles/shell.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2

READ THIS: https://git.io/brew-troubleshooting


Any reason not to just rename this PR and update with the 1.7.3 tag and revision?

@theopolis theopolis mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2016
2 tasks
@Homebrew Homebrew locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 10, 2016
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants