On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:30:28AM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > I released Linux 3.2.101 today with a backport of the retpoline > changes, and have rebased that branch onto it. The new orig tarball is > at https://people.debian.org/~benh/linux_3.2.101.orig.tar.xz > > I was able to build this branch for amd64 using gcc-4.9 from jessie, > and it reports full retpoline support. >
Hi everyone. My apologies for the unreasonably long delay in my follow-up to this. I was able to backport the gcc-4.9 packages to wheezy. It required adjusting several of the build dependencies: - libcloog-isl-dev: 0.18 -> 0.17 - libmpc-dev: 1.0 -> 0.9 - dpkg-dev: 1.17.11 -> 1.16.18 - libc6-dev-x32: removed (x32 achitecture not supported in wheezy) - libx32gcc1: removed (x32 achitecture not supported in wheezy) - binutils: 2.25-3 -> 2.22-8 - binutils-multiarch: 2.25-3 -> 2.22-8 At first I was worried about the versions of the build dependencies. However, in each case I looked at the packaging history and tried to identify if there was an identifiable reason for the specific version of the build dependency. In nearly every case I was able to conclusively determine that the version was simply "the current version of that package when the build dependency was introduced/updated." Based on that, I am comfortable that successful completion of the build indicates that my backport was "correct" and that the build dependency version adjustments did not break anything. That said, I did notice a difference between the built packages on jessie and wheezy. Specifically, none of the lib64<foo>, libn32<foo>, and libx32<foo> packages were built on wheezy. I expected the libx32 packages to be missing, but I was surprised by the others. I presume that they too are associated with x32 in some way. Is this correct? I was also concerned about building amd64 packages only and uploading those. In particular, I would have preferred to perform a source upload, but as I understand it, that will not work for wheezy. Additionally, when I checked the PTS for information on the recent jessie upload it was a binary upload built for amd64. That makes me somewhat less concerned. Would it be correct to think that this would be a "normal" upload that will end up getting built for all supported LTS architectures? I don't suppose that there would be a reason to restrict the upload to amd64 only. The packages can be found here: https://people.debian.org/~roberto/ https://people.debian.org/~roberto/gcc-4.9_4.9.2-10+deb7u1.dsc (I have signed the .dsc and .changes files with my GPG key) At this point I feel like the packages are ready for upload, but it seems prudent to first wait for confirmation that the kernel build on wheezy works with this backported gcc. Once I receive that confirmation, I will proceed with uploading and releasing a DLA (patterned after DSA-4117-1). Is there anything special that will need to be done in order to introduce a new source package to wheezy? As I was finishing this message I just noticed that I forgot to include the orig.tar.gz in the packages that I built, so I have started another build that will include it. That will be what I end up uploading, unless changes are required. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez
