Takayuki Matsuoka
Takayuki Matsuoka
As for 1.) see this post: https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/issues/550#issuecomment-1611004526
New gh-actions image contains the following compilers/libraries [ubuntu-24.04](https://github.com/actions/runner-images/blob/main/images/ubuntu/Ubuntu2404-Readme.md) - gcc-{9,10,11,12,13,14} - lib32gcc-{9,10,11,12,13,14}-dev - clang-{14,15,16,17,18} [ubuntu-22.04](https://github.com/actions/runner-images/blob/main/images/ubuntu/Ubuntu2204-Readme.md) aka `ubuntu-latest` - gcc-{9,10,11,12} - lib32gcc-{9,10,11,12}-dev - clang-{11,12,13,14,15} [ubuntu-20.04](https://github.com/actions/runner-images/blob/main/images/ubuntu/Ubuntu2004-Readme.md) - gcc-{7,8,9,10} - lib32gcc-{7,8,9,10}-dev - clang-{6.0,7,8,9,10,11,12}
Trying to migrate `gcc-13` to `ubuntu-24.04`, but GH-Actions reports strange error. `make -j -C tests test-lz4c32` for `gcc-13` on `ubuntu-24.04` fails with the following cryptic error message: `The futex facility...
I'm giving up for now :( I just replaced `ubuntu-22.04` to `ubuntu-24.04` for older compilers (gcc-[9,12] and clang-[14,15]). https://github.com/t-mat/lz4/commit/4134a0d92e982882f0e377d3c1aa9303aa080edf But GH-Actions failed. https://github.com/t-mat/lz4/actions/runs/9253898395/job/25454539937 Note that they're working fine with `ubuntu-22.04`...
There're some reports which contains `The futex facility ...` error. - https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/9848#issuecomment-2111181459 - https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/9848#issuecomment-2119011364
As of today, their `ubuntu-24.04` fails to retrieve `apt get`. It seems we need to wait their fix.
Hi, Unfortunately, we can say nothing without your actual error/log. Could you put your build log (including error) to this issue? ---- I think that we can compile lz4 on...
As for license, please refer the [`LICENSE`](https://github.com/lz4/lz4/blob/dev/LICENSE) file. Since it clearly states "all other files use a GPLv2 license", these files are licensed under [`GPL-2.0-only`](https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0-only.html).
@Cyan4973, I'm 100% sure that migrating "GPL 2 or later" is legal (as a GPL conformance, since licensee is able to choose GPLv2 or later). But we may need to...