On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:16:33PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:06:18PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> > On 2018/11/30 13:53, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > > No luck on i386 so far. sp;arc64 ios also not going to work, since the
> > > boost context lib has no sparc64 support at al. In the meantime I'm
> > > building arm boost, but that takes ages, it;s now building the
> > > gcc-4.9.4 port needed by some boost dependency...
> > >
> > > Can the impact analysis be done on amd64?
> >
> > It can, but not by me, the only bulk building environment I have is i386.
> > If there's someone who can do a test bulk build with the diff and run
> > this under script(1) and send me the output (there will be a lot as we
> > haven't done a WANTLIB sync for ages) I'll look over it ..
> >
> > cd /usr/ports/packages/amd64/all
> > /usr/ports/infrastructure/bin/check-lib-depends -d . -q -x ./*
> >
>
> Ib the meantime I built patched boost on arm, and tests work out fine
> (including pdns_recusror).
>
> -Otto
>
The status so far:
amd64: boost context is working fine
i386: only working with a very simple test program, anything using fp crashes
arm: working fine.
aarch64: after getting boost to build by skipping the numpy dependency
(which does not build since there is no gcc 4.9 which is
required to build fortran dependencies) it also works.
So all in all I think boost context can be enabled for amd64 and arm
at this moment, provided it does not break anything else. For that I
need the report sthen@ described above. Any takers?
If the above report looks good I'll submit a full diff, converting all stack
allocaters to use the proper mmap flag and enabling context only for
amd64 and arm. We can look at aarch64 and i386 later.
-Otto
