Re: Bug#635126: Raising severity to 'serious'

[Matthias Klose]

On 11/26/2011 06:09 PM, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 02:59:58PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> 
>> is the sparc maintainer information now correctly documented?
>> http://www.debian.org/ports/sparc/ still shows Ben Collins (not active as a
>> Debian GCC sparc porter either),
> 
> I don't see Ben's name mentioned anywhere on this page, so I guess you 
> mean http://www.debian.org/ports/sparc/porting, which does appear to 
> be out of date. 

right.

>> http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html shows two maintainers.
>
> I'm pretty sure I'm one of them :-). Another one is probably Aurelien 
> Jarno, who is mostly involved with the new sparc64 port.

well, I would like to hear that from himself.  My impression is that he doesn't
want to get involved with every port ;)

thanks for forwarding the report. Please could you check the test case with 4.4,
4.5 and trunk (gcc-snapshot) as well, and add the information to the upstream
report?

  Matthias


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ed2b666.40...@debian.org

Re: Increasing minimum 'i386' processor

[Hector Oron]

Hello,

2011/11/23 Matthias Klose :
> On 11/19/2011 11:42 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:

>> (Later it should be increased
>> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
>> that may be installed on amd64 systems.)  This would allow the use of
>> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
>> performance for the vast majority of users.

> could you give numbers what kind of improvements you would expect?  The 
> biggest
> burden for i386 is the register pressure, which you won't fix with targeting a
> newer processor.  The better approach would be a new port, the x32 
> architecture;
> I don't know if anybody did look into building a distribution for this
> architecture yet.  The next thing could be to default to sse2 math instead of
> x87 (didn't look if this is already the default for x32).

FWIW, Yocto has attempted to build an image for x32:
  
Yes, x32 defaults to SSE and improvements expected 7-10% on integer
math over ia32 (5-8% over intel64) and 5-11% on fp math over ia32.
Figures from
 


Cheers,
-- 
 Héctor Orón  -.. . -... .. .- -.   -.. . ...- . .-.. --- .--. . .-.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caodfwegyeux2ybij1i5orxfs2fme5mrw-eoesv2l_s2y2jh...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#650238: libgcc1 (4.6.2-4) breaks gcc-4.3 << 4.3.6-1, but there is no package for gcc-4.3(4.3.6-1)

[Pete Lesko]

Package: libgcc1
Version: 1:4.6.2-4
Severity: important

While trying to compile virtualbox-source, or virtualbox-dkms, I had no 
linux-headers installed. 
I cannot install the headers because it expects gcc-4.3. 
gcc-4.3 won't install because the current version of libgcc1 breaks gcc-4.3 
before version 4.3.6-1. 
As of today, I cannot seem to find a gcc-4.3 package at version 4.3.6-1 
anywhere, including unstable.
If I attempt to downgrade libgcc1, it removes virtualbox-source and 
virtualbox-dkms.

If there is some kind of workaround someone could suggest, I'm more than 
willing to try it out

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages libgcc1 depends on:
ii  gcc-4.6-base   4.6.2-4
ii  libc6  2.13-21
ii  multiarch-support  2.13-21

libgcc1 recommends no packages.

libgcc1 suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2028021902.24272.58595.reportbug@localhost