dev-libs/nss-3.107 missing 'endif'(SOLVED)

[ian848uig]

Hi everyone, since a week ago I have a problem with nss version 3.107 failing because of missing endif, I tried compiling version 3.106 and recompiling version 3.105, but it gives the same error.
I tried to add the missing endif in the file on line 53, but portage deletes the directory (theoretically) when I try to re-emerge nss, which makes adding the missing line useless.
output:

https://pastebin.com/7NwCyyH8

and

https://pastebin.com/jmYqDWg6

NOTE: GCC14 downgraded it from 14.3.9999 to 20241123 (the problem still persists), the error is the same, it was not necessary to copy and paste the recent output again.

Mod edit: URLs made clickable. — JRG
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[John R. Graham]

Looks like you've remove a hard mask from dev-build/make-9999. I'd try to downgrade back to current stable make and then retry building nss.

- John
_________________
I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters.

[ian848uig]

So, could it be a make problem, not a GCC problem?
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[John R. Graham]

Yes it could. dev-libs/nss-3.107 builds successfully here with sys-devel/gcc-14.2.1_p20241116.

I was trying to reproduce your problem by building make-9999, but it wouldn't build for me, so I didn't get that far. Still, it's the likely culprit: things are generally hard masked for a reason.

- John
_________________
I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters.

[ian848uig]

it works, I degrade make and it works and in 30 seconds (approximately) dev-libs/nss was compiled and installed.

[sam_]

If running various things from git - which can be helpful testing and rather educational, please do (and I mean this in a sincere, constructive way) "learn to debug". This is similar to http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html and also https://xyproblem.info/, but especially https://stackoverflow.com/help/minimal-reproducible-example

The difference between a mess and something actionable is whether you can try narrow down which component caused it, and then start to poke at extracting an example. Otherwise, it's just a very confused, very broken computer

In your situation, I would (ignoring that I'd probably preserve the directory and so on first) clone NSS manually and copy what the ebuild does to see if i can reproduce it. Then I can rule out the ebuild being at fault. And so on. You would soon end up hopefully with a testcase Makefile that either shows something NSS is doing wrong in its Makefiles, or a clear indicator that it's a GNU Make bug.

I would also say it should be obvious to try downgrade Make if you know you're using make from git and you're getting an error in a Makefile. If that isn't obvious, try to narrow down what is experimental about your system until this sort of investigative approach feels more comfortable to you. (For example, if you're running so much on your system from git that it wasn't at least somewhat obvious to try downgrade Make, that might be a sign you're doing too much.)

But you can get there and this post is not intended as a telling off -- just trying to give advice on doing what you're doing in a more rewarding way (for you and others).

[Hu]

ian848uig: why did you have a live ebuild of GNU make installed? If you're doing it to test compatibility or to learn, as sam_ mentioned, then that is fine. Live ebuilds can be more trouble than well tested ones, so if you don't have a specific reason why you have a live ebuild installed, then you probably should not have it installed because of the likelihood that you are causing trouble for yourself.

[ian848uig]

There is no specific reason why I installed a GNU Make Live ebuild, before the NSS thing I had no problems with it, I'm sure it broke due to a commit and caused this problem, plus I think Make was outdated for various reasons, theoretically recompiling GNU Make would surely fix it (but there is a chance it could break again), so I decided not to waste my time and downgrade Make. Also the NSS bug caused me to have 170 outdated packages (I just finished upgrading them today)
I didn't realize it was GNU Make that was causing the problem, when downgrading GCC didn't fix it.
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[Hu]

Rebuilding GNU Make may or may not have fixed it, depending on whether the commit that caused the problem has been reverted or corrected upstream. If the offending commit is still active and present upstream, rebuilding make-9999 would not help.

[sam_]

I feel like this isn't answering how we got to the place where you needed to make the thread in the first place, though - which is what Hu and I are trying to drill down into.

[ian848uig]

If you mean why it was necessary to create the thread, I didn't find a solution to the problem originally and it didn't occur to me that GNU Make was responsible.
I don't know if that answers the question.
Also, if I had thought otherwise or had thought to check the nss directory, I would have probably found the cause and wouldn't have come to the forum in the first place, but since downgrading GCC didn't work, I didn't think make was a candidate.
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[pingtoo]

I am not sure for others but I am also curious on

[ian848uig]

It was that the GNU Make Live ebuild wouldn't recompile (I think, I can't confirm), possibly due to the problems I had with GCC14 last week when using smart-live-rebuild, but I was relieved to have downgraded it and done the same with make.
If you're wondering, I had make-9999 installed for almost 2 months and the problem with NSS started a few days ago, until 2 or 3 weeks ago I was able to recompile NSS without problems.
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[Hu]

I would still like to understand why make-9999 was installed. OP wrote that "There is no specific reason why I installed" it. As a live ebuild, it has no keywords, so it is very difficult for someone to install accidentally. That suggests it was installed on purpose, which leads to: why did you install a live ebuild of GNU make? Nothing in the tree should have required it.

[ian848uig]

I installed make thinking it wouldn't cause any problems at the time, but a few days ago I started having problems with NSS as I mentioned earlier.
I guess I should say what I didn't say: I installed the make Live ebuild just for the sake of installing it, i.e. I wasn't happy with gcc and decided to install make-9999. I'm being pretty honest with this
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[pingtoo]

[Hu]

ian848uig: that is fine. We have had many cases of users installing a live version because they wrongly thought it was needed, rather than your case where you just wanted to see what would happen. Therefore, I wanted to determine what output had led you to believe you needed it. The answer is there was no need, and you never wrongly thought that you needed it. There is nothing wrong with installing packages for experimentation, though In the future, please try to call out prominently if a failure is coincident to use of a live version, as such versions are often the first thing that readers should suspect.

[ian848uig]

Thank you very much for the help, I will proceed to mark this thread as SOLVED.
_________________
I like everything that is Linux, free and open source software. I am a teenager

[John R. Graham]

[pingtoo]