[AUH] alsa-lib: upgrading to 1.2.15 FAILED

Hello,

this email is a notification from the Auto Upgrade Helper
that the automatic attempt to upgrade the recipe(s) *alsa-lib* to *1.2.15* has Failed(do_compile).

Detailed error information:

do_compile failed



Next steps:
    - apply the patch: git am 0001-alsa-lib-upgrade-1.2.14-1.2.15.patch
    - check the changes to upstream patches and summarize them in the commit message,
    - compile an image that contains the package
    - perform some basic sanity tests
    - amend the patch and sign it off: git commit -s --reset-author --amend
    - send it to the appropriate mailing list

Alternatively, if you believe the recipe should not be upgraded at this time,
you can fill RECIPE_NO_UPDATE_REASON in respective recipe file so that
automatic upgrades would no longer be attempted.

Please review the attached files for further information and build/update failures.
Any problem please file a bug at https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Automated%20Update%20Handler

Regards,
The Upgrade Helper

-- >8 --
From c24c6047d5ba62e911395a7c7a85fbe6b6b5c748 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Upgrade Helper <auh@yoctoproject.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 05:45:11 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] alsa-lib: upgrade 1.2.14 -> 1.2.15

---
 .../alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb => alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb}             | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
 rename meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb => alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb} (94%)

Greetings,

On 12/16/25 09:02, Auto Upgrade Helper via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this email is a notification from the Auto Upgrade Helper
> that the automatic attempt to upgrade the recipe(s) *alsa-lib* to *1.2.15* has Failed(do_compile).
>
> Detailed error information:
>
> do_compile failed
>
>
>
> Next steps:
>      - apply the patch: git am 0001-alsa-lib-upgrade-1.2.14-1.2.15.patch
>      - check the changes to upstream patches and summarize them in the commit message,
>      - compile an image that contains the package
>      - perform some basic sanity tests
>      - amend the patch and sign it off: git commit -s --reset-author --amend
>      - send it to the appropriate mailing list
>
> Alternatively, if you believe the recipe should not be upgraded at this time,
> you can fill RECIPE_NO_UPDATE_REASON in respective recipe file so that
> automatic upgrades would no longer be attempted.
>
> Please review the attached files for further information and build/update failures.
> Any problem please file a bug at https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Automated%20Update%20Handler
>
> Regards,
> The Upgrade Helper
>
> -- >8 --
>  From c24c6047d5ba62e911395a7c7a85fbe6b6b5c748 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Upgrade Helper <auh@yoctoproject.org>
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 05:45:11 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] alsa-lib: upgrade 1.2.14 -> 1.2.15
>
> ---
>   .../alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb => alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb}             | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>   rename meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb => alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb} (94%)
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb
> similarity index 94%
> rename from meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb
> rename to meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb
> index 41a42f9ecc..bf20e1a1ad 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.14.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/alsa-lib_1.2.15.bb
> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=a916467b91076e631dd8edb7424769c7 \
>                       "
>   
>   SRC_URI = "https://www.alsa-project.org/files/pub/lib/${BP}.tar.bz2"
> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "be9c88a0b3604367dd74167a2b754a35e142f670292ae47a2fdef27a2ee97a32"
> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "83770841585e766a60c99fd23f8c574c22643ae0cb1f2d20b793c3d84eb95a8d"
>   
>   inherit autotools pkgconfig


I probably won't have time to investigate this, but there turned out to 
be no issue here.
I upgraded the recipe with devtool (as AUH does too, I guess), and the 
changes built fine.

So apparently a false positive here (meaning "failed" instead of 
"succeeded¨).
Cheers
Michael.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 at 13:22, Michael Opdenacker via
lists.openembedded.org
<michael.opdenacker=rootcommit.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:

> I probably won't have time to investigate this, but there turned out to
> be no issue here.
> I upgraded the recipe with devtool (as AUH does too, I guess), and the
> changes built fine.
>
> So apparently a false positive here (meaning "failed" instead of
> "succeeded¨).

Did you build specifically with musl, on qemuarm?

Alex

Hi Alex,

On 12/17/25 13:25, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 at 13:22, Michael Opdenacker via
> lists.openembedded.org
> <michael.opdenacker=rootcommit.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
>
>> I probably won't have time to investigate this, but there turned out to
>> be no issue here.
>> I upgraded the recipe with devtool (as AUH does too, I guess), and the
>> changes built fine.
>>
>> So apparently a false positive here (meaning "failed" instead of
>> "succeeded¨).
> Did you build specifically with musl, on qemuarm?
No, glibc and systemd (poky-altcfg) on qemux86-64.

Indeed, that's a different platform :)
I guess I should try qemu with musl then too.
Cheers
Michael.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 at 13:41, Michael Opdenacker via
lists.openembedded.org
<michael.opdenacker=rootcommit.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
> No, glibc and systemd (poky-altcfg) on qemux86-64.
>
> Indeed, that's a different platform :)
> I guess I should try qemu with musl then too.

AUH tests these two, so if glibc succeeds, but musl fails, it's almost
certainly a musl-specific fail.

Alex