Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-07 Thread James McCoy
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 09:08:37PM -0500, James McCoy wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:04:30AM +, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > > I'd guess this is a problem with the locale. In my case an unknown > > locale adds 8, rather than 10, additional lines, but still: > > > > $ LANG=C ./foo.pl > >

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-07 Thread James McCoy
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:04:30AM +, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > I'd guess this is a problem with the locale. In my case an unknown > locale adds 8, rather than 10, additional lines, but still: > > $ LANG=C ./foo.pl > Global symbol "$foo" requires explicit package name at ./foo.pl line 3. >

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-07 Thread Edmund Grimley Evans
I'd guess this is a problem with the locale. In my case an unknown locale adds 8, rather than 10, additional lines, but still: $ LANG=C ./foo.pl Global symbol "$foo" requires explicit package name at ./foo.pl line 3. Execution of ./foo.pl aborted due to compilation errors. $ LANG=sq ./foo.pl perl:

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-04 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:34:04AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 07:43:03AM -0500, James McCoy wrote: >>On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:53:29PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >>> >>> amdahl is the arm64 porterbox, and I've just checked - it has armel >>> and armhf schroots configu

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-04 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 07:43:03AM -0500, James McCoy wrote: >On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:53:29PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> amdahl is the arm64 porterbox, and I've just checked - it has armel >> and armhf schroots configured too. That should hopefully cover what >> you need - shout if you

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-03 Thread James McCoy
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:53:29PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Hi James, and Happy New Year to you and yours! Thanks! > On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 10:50:25AM -0500, James McCoy wrote: > >The "Test_compiler line 24" one is odd. All that test does is create a > >file foo.pl > > > >#!/usr/bin/p

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2019-01-02 Thread Steve McIntyre
Hi James, and Happy New Year to you and yours! On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 10:50:25AM -0500, James McCoy wrote: >On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 04:38:10AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: ... >> From test_alot.vim: >> Found errors in Test_compiler(): >> function RunTheTest[40]..Test_compiler line 18: command d

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2018-12-31 Thread James McCoy
On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 04:38:10AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > I've been doing a full rebuild of the Debian archive, building all > source packages targeting armel and armhf using arm64 hardware. We are > planning in future to move all of our 32-bit armel/armhf builds to > using arm64 machines,

Bug#917859: vim FTBFS building for armel,armhf on arm64

2018-12-30 Thread Steve McIntyre
Package: src:vim Version: 2:8.1.0549-1 Severity: important Hi! I've been doing a full rebuild of the Debian archive, building all source packages targeting armel and armhf using arm64 hardware. We are planning in future to move all of our 32-bit armel/armhf builds to using arm64 machines, so this