elfutils: rebase cxx-header-collision.patch

[RossComputerGuy]

Things done

Fix cxx-header-collision.patch for LLVM.

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[lucasew]

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 370365

[lucasew]

Please rebase the PR, or force push, so eval runs again.

[RossComputerGuy]

Eval is working as expected, #330567 + Mic92/nixpkgs-review#440 would allow for evaluating pkgsLLVM with nixpkgs-review.

[risicle]

Assume this issue is not addressed by https://sourceware.org/git/?p=elfutils.git;a=commit;f=config/eu.am;h=b426c4db31e7c80d4262abdd845d2ece0c9a841c then?

[RossComputerGuy]

Assume this issue is not addressed by

Yes, I believe this PR already mentioned that I tried having this fixed upstream but their fix didn't work in Nix but worked on Gentoo.

[risicle]

WFM, nixos x86_64 pkgsLLVM

[risicle]

Though I do wonder if this should be aimed at staging to save pkgsLLVM users from unexpected rebuilds, even though hydra isn't affected.

[RossComputerGuy]

Though I do wonder if this should be aimed at staging to save pkgsLLVM users from unexpected rebuilds, even though hydra isn't affected.

Historically, pkgsLLVM has been exempt due to the low number of expect users. Plus, many things people might need don't work in nixpkgs without using my Nixpkgs LLVM workspace repo.