On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:38:55PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:11:54PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > it breaks architecture bootstrap.
>
> I am missing context I am afraid. But which architecture is broken atm?
This is about cross building new architectures.
Kurt
On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:11:54PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> it breaks architecture bootstrap.
I am missing context I am afraid. But which architecture is broken atm?
We do have an upstream buildbot for elfutils that checks various distro,
architectures:
https://builder.wildebeest.org/buildbot
On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:11:54PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Kurt,
>
> Unless I hear a response soon, I'll NMU this, because it breaks
> architecture bootstrap.
Just NMU it, I think the patch you've send is fine.
Kurt
Hi Kurt,
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 10:01:28PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I already changed my mind to keep it as it currently is.
That's all fine, but what prevents you from uploading my improvements to
the handling of nocheck? (Nothing changes for native builds without the
nocheck profile or opti
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 06:56:59PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 18:16 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > > I'm wondering if I should just disable the biarch tests on all
> > > arches and remove the gcc-multilib Depends completly.
> >
> > I won't disagree with that.
> >
Hi,
On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 18:16 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > I'm wondering if I should just disable the biarch tests on all
> > arches and remove the gcc-multilib Depends completly.
>
> I won't disagree with that.
>
> Personally, I'd like to see biarch/multilib to die as soon as possible.
> U
Hi Kurt,
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 08:40:49AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:07:14PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > For ppc64el, we see:
> > | configure: WARNING: not running biarch tests, gcc -m32 does not work
> > Indeed, a gcc-multilib package might help here. gcc doesn't
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:07:14PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
>
> So let's look at elfutils again. For x32, the failing test is
> run-backtrace-native-biarch.sh, so this looks a lot like a multilib
> issue. On the other hand, any-amd64 matches[1] x32, so gcc-multilib is
> being installed and we c
Hi Kurt,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:20:08PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:25:16AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > Hi Kurt,
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:36:41PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > This all looks fine. I'm just wondering why gcc-multilib is a
> > > probl
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:25:16AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Kurt,
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:36:41PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > This all looks fine. I'm just wondering why gcc-multilib is a
> > problem in your case since it was already any-amd64. I'm also
> > wondering if any othe
Hi Kurt,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:36:41PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> This all looks fine. I'm just wondering why gcc-multilib is a
> problem in your case since it was already any-amd64. I'm also
> wondering if any other arches need it, like x32 and ppc64el.
Well, kfreebsd-amd64 matches any-a
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:18:45PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Source: elfutils
> Version: 0.166-2
> Severity: minor
> Tags: patch
> User: helm...@debian.org
> Usertags: rebootstrap
>
> Hi Kurt,
>
> Thank you for applying my cross build patch from #818099. This makes
> elfutils practically cros
Source: elfutils
Version: 0.166-2
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
User: helm...@debian.org
Usertags: rebootstrap
Hi Kurt,
Thank you for applying my cross build patch from #818099. This makes
elfutils practically cross buildable, but cross building it is still
annoying, because its Build-Depends are n
13 matches
Mail list logo
