Re: Bug#859667: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-09 Thread Iain Buclaw
On 9 April 2017 at 14:40, Andreas Tille wrote: > reopen 859667 > thanks > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 06:03:46PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote: >> > >> > >> > I have the feelingt that this meand "no" to your second question. >> > >> >> isNaN is from the std.math module. >> >> http://dlang.org/phobos/std_

Re: Bug#859667: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-09 Thread Andreas Tille
reopen 859667 thanks On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 06:03:46PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote: > > > > > > I have the feelingt that this meand "no" to your second question. > > > > isNaN is from the std.math module. > > http://dlang.org/phobos/std_math.html#.isNaN > > You would need to import it. ;-) I thi

Re: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-07 Thread Konstantinos Margaritis
Στις 07-04-2017, ημέρα Παρ, και ώρα 18:03 +0200, ο/η Iain Buclaw έγραψε: > On 7 April 2017 at 16:02, Andreas Tille wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:22:28PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote: > > > Which compiler? > > > > $ LANG=C apt-cache policy ldc > > ldc: > >   Installed: 1:1.1.1-1 > > > > > Are

Re: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-07 Thread Iain Buclaw
On 7 April 2017 at 16:02, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:22:28PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote: >> Which compiler? > > $ LANG=C apt-cache policy ldc > ldc: > Installed: 1:1.1.1-1 > >> Are NaNs being honoured? > > Hmmm, no idea how to check this. > Someone who maintains ldc might k

Re: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-07 Thread Andreas Tille
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:22:28PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote: > Which compiler? $ LANG=C apt-cache policy ldc ldc: Installed: 1:1.1.1-1 > Are NaNs being honoured? Hmmm, no idea how to check this. > What if you were to replace > the `(x != x && f != f)` comparison with `(isNaN(x) && isNaN(f))`

Re: [Pkg-d-devel] Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-05 Thread Iain Buclaw
Which compiler? Are NaNs being honoured? What if you were to replace the `(x != x && f != f)` comparison with `(isNaN(x) && isNaN(f))` ? On 5 April 2017 at 22:00, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I admit I'm totally clueless and thus I'm asking D language team as well as > porters for help. > > Th

Re: Bug#859667: libundead: FTBFS on armhf and ppc64el: tests fail

2017-04-05 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi, I admit I'm totally clueless and thus I'm asking D language team as well as porters for help. Thanks for any helpful hint Andreas. On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 02:43:04PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Source: libundead > Version: 1.0.6-1 > Severity: important > Justification: fails to buil