GH-43228: [C++] Fix Abseil compile error on GCC 13

[amol-]

Rationale for this change

When trying to compile Arrow with GCC 13, it fails due to ABSEIL missing a <cstdint> include, this PR addresses the issue by adding the missing include.

There have been past reports for this issue too: #36969

This is a more minimal fix that tries to avoid the complexity of previous attempts like #43147 and #37066 which involved updating Abseil and facing additional issues to fix.

What changes are included in this PR?

Add the missing include when GCC>=13

Are these changes tested?

They are tested by the existing compile infrastructure and testsuite and by adding a new GCC-13 based CPP test environment for bundled builds.

Are there any user-facing changes?

No, all behaviours should remain the same

• GitHub Issue: [C++] vendored abseil fails to build with gcc-13 #43228

[amol-]

@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp -g r

[github-actions]

Revision: 8f503ae7d8bab313b6325992c32859770dc29a98

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-defadac854

Task	Status
r-binary-packages
test-alpine-linux-cpp
test-build-cpp-fuzz
test-conda-cpp
test-conda-cpp-valgrind
test-cuda-cpp
test-debian-12-cpp-amd64
test-debian-12-cpp-i386
test-fedora-39-cpp
test-r-arrow-backwards-compatibility
test-r-clang-sanitizer
test-r-depsource-bundled
test-r-depsource-system
test-r-dev-duckdb
test-r-devdocs
test-r-gcc-11
test-r-gcc-12
test-r-install-local
test-r-install-local-minsizerel
test-r-linux-as-cran
test-r-linux-rchk
test-r-linux-valgrind
test-r-minimal-build
test-r-offline-maximal
test-r-offline-minimal
test-r-rhub-debian-gcc-devel-lto-latest
test-r-rhub-debian-gcc-release-custom-ccache
test-r-rhub-ubuntu-release-latest
test-r-rocker-r-ver-latest
test-r-rstudio-r-base-4.1-opensuse155
test-r-rstudio-r-base-4.2-focal
test-r-ubuntu-22.04
test-r-versions
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-bundled
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-minimal-with-formats
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-thread-sanitizer
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-20
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-emscripten
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-no-threading
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-14
test-ubuntu-r-sanitizer

[amol-]

@raulcd @assignUser this should be ready for review, I tried a more conservative approach as upgrading Abseil introduced more problems than it fixed even on the most conservative version upgrade.

[kou]

Could you open a new issue for this instead of reusing existing closed issue?

[amol-]

Could you open a new issue for this instead of reusing existing closed issue?

Given it's the same exact error message shouldn't we preserve a consolidated history by keeping the original issue?
Happy to open a new issue if that's the preference

[raulcd]

The problem is that the original issue is in the 13.0.0 milestone and all our current release scripts take that into account to generate release notes, etcetera. If we reuse the same issue it would be as if this PR was released on 13.0.0 and if we require to back port this issue it gets messy.
It has it's pros and cons but the current process doesn't account for two PRs pointing to the same GH issue.

[amol-]

The problem is that the original issue is in the 13.0.0 milestone

Makes sense, I didn't check and thought it was closed without being done. I'll open a new one.

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #43228 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[kou]

Can we reproduce this by the following change?

diff --git a/dev/tasks/tasks.yml b/dev/tasks/tasks.yml
index 45417acf85..cd5f119b77 100644
--- a/dev/tasks/tasks.yml
+++ b/dev/tasks/tasks.yml
@@ -1418,6 +1418,16 @@ tasks:
         GCC_VERSION: 12
       image: ubuntu-r-only-r
 
+  # This also has -flto=auto
+  test-r-gcc-13:
+    ci: github
+    template: docker-tests/github.linux.yml
+    params:
+      env:
+        UBUNTU: 24.04
+        GCC_VERSION: 13
+      image: ubuntu-r-only-r
+
   test-r-minimal-build:
     ci: azure
     template: r/azure.linux.yml

[amol-]

@github-actions crossbow submit test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled

[github-actions]

Revision: d59f39b

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-a91e2018b6

Task	Status
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled

[amol-]

@kou test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled now compiles correctly. It fails the test, but it seems unrelated as they are timezone related tests. I'll kick-off a check on ubuntu-20.04 to confirm the test failures are unrelated.

I think that this is ready for final review.

[amol-]

@github-actions crossbow submit test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-bundled

[github-actions]

Revision: 70e6e7d

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-3d162f80dd

Task	Status
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-bundled

[amol-]

@github-actions crossbow submit test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled

[github-actions]

Revision: 943baa0

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-ecde5a2c6e

Task	Status
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled

[amol-]

The timestamp tests now pass too by installing tzdata-legacy

[assignUser]

Looks good, thanks! Could you also remove the workaround we added to r/configure?

[amol-]

@github-actions crossbow submit test-r-depsource-bundled

[github-actions]

Revision: 0a6e367

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-c9cac2c09c

Task	Status
test-r-depsource-bundled

[amol-]

Looks good, thanks! Could you also remove the workaround we added to r/configure?

Done and tested on test-r-depsource-bundled

[assignUser]

@github-actions crossbow submit r-binary-packages
Nice, thanks. I'll run this as it has a build on 24.04 which comes with the new gcc. I'll merge after

[github-actions]

Revision: 0a6e367

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-4b94da66a4

Task	Status
r-binary-packages

[assignUser]

Ugh, turns out ubuntu-latest is still 22.04, I modified the crossbow workflow to re-run on 24.04

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit aaeff72.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 1 possible false positive for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.