On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2013/9/30 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@gmail.com>: >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:48 AM, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2013/9/11 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@gmail.com>: >>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Felipe Sateler <fsate...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> In all archs except i386 and amd64 :( >>>>> >>>>> So far I have the following that works, >>>> >>>> Hmm, turns out it doesn't. sclang needs atomic too. >>> >>> Well, FWIW the patch certainly looks tolerable to me. I understand >>> your concern about the linking. I don't (afaik) have a way to poke >>> around with those other archs myself. >> >> We could try to get you access to debian porterboxes[1]. >> [1]http://dsa.debian.org/doc/guest-account/ > > Oops, I completely didn't answer this email. Sorry. Yes, I'd be happy > to try some testing on porterboxes if debian people are OK to let me > in.
I'm willing to sponsor you. Please send a mail with the details so that I can sign it and open the request. Please use the same key you are using for signing the upstream tarballs in git. > >> Can we force disabling of all these optimizations in untested archs? > > You mean the use of boost-lockfree and boost-atomic? I'm afraid > they're baked in, there are no alternative un-optimised code paths. It > could partially be done by restricting the "supercollider-supernova" > package just to i386 and amd64 (note that supercollider-supernova is > an alternative non-default implementation of supercollider-server, so > not so necessary). But then, the libs are used elsewhere around the > code, so that doesn't actually help... Sigh... So that means either dropping non-x86 arches, or getting boost to work everywhere... -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
