On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 20:44 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 07:43:18AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 22:49 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 08:20:53PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 02:10 +0100, Wookey wrote: > > > > > Also if anyone has expertise in language porting we'd like to hear > > > > > from you. Below is the list of languages we believe still need > > > > > porting to arm64: > > > > > > > > Ruby wasn't on the list, is that under control? > > > > > > > > Ruby seems to be at the bottom of the build-dep chain for the kernel > > > > (linux->patchutils->rpm->libsemanage->ruby). > > > > > > The code is ported, but starting at 1.9 Ruby needs an existing Ruby > > > interpreter to build. Ruby 1.8 needs only gcc-4.6 ... which needs > > > patchutils. So we got ourselves a loop there. > > > > FWIW I managed to build ruby1.8 with gcc-4.9 using the patch below. I > > don't know if it works though. > > Making it build is the easy part. :)
:-D > I had to force gcc-4.6 some time ago because building with gcc-4.7 (the > default at the time IIRC) caused segmentation faults. Looking at newer > comments at the corresponding bug logs (#674541) there are suggestions > about gcc flags that fix the issue, so I tried them here and it seems to > work, at least as far as being usable to bootstrap ruby2.1. I have > uploaded that now, let's see what happens. Cool, thanks! I think it was mentioned in this thread somewhere already -- should #742102 (removal request) be postponed until Ruby can be bootstrapped? Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1400318366.29121.31.ca...@dagon.hellion.org.uk
