On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:58 PM, YunQiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Sébastien Villemot > <sebast...@debian.org> wrote: >> Dear YunQiang, >> >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 06:15:08PM +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: >>> Package: src:ffcall >>> Version: 2.1-1 >>> >>> MIPS release 6 drops some instructions: bnel/beql included. >>> For r6, we should use bne/beq for replace. >>> >>> The patch has submit in salsa as a merge request. >>> >>> https://salsa.debian.org/common-lisp-team/ffcall/merge_requests/1 >> >> Thanks for your report and your patch. >> >> You may have overlooked the fact that these assembly files are actually >> generated by GCC from C source code (see the DEP-3 header of >> debian/patches/mips-fpxx.patch), so your proposed patch is not very >> maintainable in the long term. > > Oh, thanks. Since then, I guess we should generate these .S files > when build instead of put them in the source code. > > I will have a look at it.
After read Makefile.devel, I think that we should call the right target in debian/rules. Should this the ideal way? > >> >> Is there a plan to bump the baseline of our mips* architectures to r6? If >> yes, >> then the solution is simply to regenerate the files with the updated GCC once >> it is uploaded to sid. If not, then I'm not sure to understand the benefits >> of >> this patch in Debian. > > In fact we treat MIPS r6 as total different architectures. > In future, we may replace the current r2 with r6, while never `update'. > > Currently, we just make the source compatible. > >> >> Best, >> >> -- >> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot >> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer >> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name >> ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ http://www.debian.org > > > > -- > YunQiang Su -- YunQiang Su
