Hello, On Sat 21 Dec 2024 at 03:34pm +01, Paul Gevers wrote:
> How severe do you think this error is? Does it indicate that sbcl is > useless on ppc64el or is this a niche use case? I would doubt that it means that sbcl is useless on ppc64el because of how upstream can't reproduce the problem. > Removal of sbcl on ppc64el seems to be going to be non-trivial as it's a key > package via cl-cffi which is needed for brltty which is very important for our > accessibility support (pulled in via d-i if I'm not mistaken). An alternative would just be to downgrade sbcl with a +really version. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
