Control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1761665
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 10:27:02 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Here's the generated file. The build is still going, so I don't know
> whether the FTBFS will be reproducible.
Looks like yes. I think this is the same issue a
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 10:10:53 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 at 20:25:54 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> > mozjs102 fails to build on armhf
> ...
> > In function ‘uint64_t js::jit::AtomicCmpXchg64SeqCst(uint64_t*,
> > uint64_t, uint64_t)’,
> > inlined from ‘static T
> > js::j
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 at 20:25:54 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> mozjs102 fails to build on armhf
...
> In function ‘uint64_t js::jit::AtomicCmpXchg64SeqCst(uint64_t*,
> uint64_t, uint64_t)’,
> inlined from ‘static T
> js::jit::AtomicOperations::fetchAndSeqCst(T*, T) [with T = long long
> int]’ at
Source: mozjs102
Version: 102.2.0-1
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-arm@lists.debian.org
Tags: ftbfs help
mozjs102 fails to build on armhf. This is a problem because it is
blocking us from being able to switch Debian's gjs to use mozjs102
instead of the obsolete mozjs91.
https://buildd.d
4 matches
Mail list logo