On Nov 12, 2011, at 15:56, Anthony Green wrote:
> On 11/1/2011 4:55 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> On Nov 01, 2011, at 11:53, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>> Please consider applying.
>
> I like this patch, and have applied it after a minor tweak (cache
> cif->rtype->size
On Sep 01, 2010, at 08:22, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010, Simon Richter wrote:
>> I just converted a package to multiarch, and dh_makeshlibs complains
>> about the library being gone. The library has moved to the multiarch
>> subdir appropriate for $(DEB_HOST_ARCH), and can be found
Re-sent with the correct email address for Steve (I hope), and an attached
copy of the referenced patch.
On Oct 07, 2011, at 17:01, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Sep 01, 2010, at 08:22, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010, Simon Richter wrote:
>>> I just converted a package to multiarch, and
rom: "Moffett, Kyle D"
> Date: October 04, 2011 18:12:27 EDT
> To: Debian Bug Tracking System
> Subject: libffi: Build errors on PowerPC e500, test-suite failures on PowerPC
> soft-float
>
> Package: libffi
> Severity: normal
> Tags: patch upstream
> User: de
Hi!
On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/07/2011 01:30 PM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
>> W dniu 07.10.2011 11:48, Marcin Juszkiewicz pisze:
When compiling a GCC stage1 cross-compiler, the generated control file
depends on "libgcc" even when one is not built, making it
On Oct 08, 2011, at 14:47, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> except that it does break the native build :-/ pretty please test cross
>> patches
>> with a native build too.
>>
>> with_libgcc is unset with this patch. the stage stuff should go after setti
Hi Matthias! Thanks for your help!
On Oct 09, 2011, at 04:47, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/08/2011 10:31 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Source: gcc-4.6
>> Version: 4.6.1-13
>> Severity: serious
>> Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the
>> past)
>>
>> When trying t
Matthias,
On Oct 10, 2011, at 04:14, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/09/2011 08:49 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> I don't see this. is /usr/include/asm a symlink? is gcc-multilib the recent
>>> version in unstable? If this is a local b
reassign 644764 gcc-defaults 1.107
fixed 644764 1.108
close 644764
thanks
On Oct 10, 2011, at 13:55, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/10/2011 07:52 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> This build failure is for a native build of
>> an amd64 "gcc-4.6" on an amd64 system (See the
On Oct 08, 2011, at 17:20, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Oct 08, 2011, at 14:47, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> except that it does break the native build :-/ pretty please test cross
>>> patches
>>> with a native build too.
>>>
>>> with_libgcc is unset wit
Hi Matthias,
On Oct 11, 2011, at 14:24, Matthias Klose wrote:
> why use graphite at all for the stage1 build?
Well, this isn't really the stage1 build of GCC. When bootstrapping an
architecture I want to avoid rebuilding packages as much as possible,
which means that I want a "final-stage" GCC t
On Oct 11, 2011, at 17:47, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 10:49 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Source: gcc-4.6
>> Version: 4.6.1-15
>> Severity: wishlist
>>
>> When building in REVERSE_CROSS mode (IE: when trying to build a native
>> compiler for another architecture with an existing cross-comp
On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/05/2011 12:12 AM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Package: libffi
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: patch upstream
>> User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
>> Usertags: powerpcspe
>>
>> The Debian-Ports "powerpcspe" architecture can't currently build the
Hi Matthias!
On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10/05/2011 12:12 AM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Package: libffi
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: patch upstream
>> User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
>> Usertags: powerpcspe
>>
>> The Debian-Ports "powerpcspe" architecture can't curren
On Fri 24-06-11 11:03:52, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>>> On Jun 24, 2011, at 09:46, Jan Kara wrote:
>>>> On Thu 23-06-11 16:19:08, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>>>>> Besides which, line 534 in the Debian 2.6.32 kernel I am using is this
>>>>>
On Aug 30, 2011, at 18:12, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 26-08-11 16:03:32, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> Ping?
>>
>> Any more ideas for debugging this issue?
>
> Sorry for not getting to you earlier.
That's ok, I have a workaround so it's been on my back burner fo
On Sep 12, 2011, at 12:04, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:56:05AM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Specifically, my patch allows you enable both password and public-key auth,
>> by preseeding both a password and the authorized_keys URL. If you don't
>> want to enable password authe
On Nov 01, 2011, at 11:53, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> After upgrading to a new version of GNU ld for PowerPC e500, I started
> seeing build errors on e500 systems again. It turns out that the
> PowerPC "string instructions" are unimplemented on PPC440 and most other
> embedded cores, and also cause une
Hello,
I have verified that gcc-4.6 and gcj-4.6 both build successfully
on "powerpcspe" with that patch. It turns out gcj needs to build
an embedded copy of libffi (is that OK under Debian policy?), so
I also had to apply the new libffi patch in #647288 [1].
This patch modifies a case conditiona
On Nov 02, 2011, at 17:07, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 11/02/2011 04:09 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have verified that gcc-4.6 and gcj-4.6 both build successfully
>> on "powerpcspe" with that patch. It turns out gcj needs to build
>> a
Hello,
The fix for GCC PR target/50906 has now been applied to gcc-4_6-branch,
so it should hopefully soon be automatically picked up in the Debian GCC
sources from that branch.
For reference, the commit log is attached below.
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
On Dec 05, 2011, at 22:47, amodra at gcc dot gn
Hello again!
I know it's been ages, but I finally got some time to get that patch
tested out and try additional debugging.
On Sep 01, 2011, at 11:17, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 30-08-11 19:26:22, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 2011, at 18:12, Jan Kara wrote:
>>>> I
On Oct 30, 2011, at 12:21, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> tag 644662 + moreinfo
> thanks
>
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Source: eglibc
>> Version: 2.13-21
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: upstream patch
>>
>> The attached patch fixes detection of GCC -fstack-protector a
Oops, typoed the build log URL in the original bug report:
http://buildd.debian-ports.org/fetch.php?pkg=perl&ver=5.10.1-13%2Bb101&arch=powerpcspe&stamp=1276371376&file=log&as=raw
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsu
Whoops, looks like the Debian bug-tracker lost the CC list somehow. I believe
I've got all the CCs re-added, sorry for any duplicate emails.
On Mar 01, 2011, at 11:52, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 2.6.32-30
> Severity: important
>
> I'm getting a repeatable BUG from ext4,
On Apr 02, 2011, at 22:02, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> Sorry for not following up sooner. Are you still able to reproduce
> this failure? If I set up an identical Debian stable instance on
> EC-2, am I likely to reproduce it myself? Do you have a package list
> or EC2 base image I can use as a starting po
On Apr 04, 2011, at 10:24, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
> On Apr 02, 2011, at 22:02, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>> Sorry for not following up sooner. Are you still able to reproduce
>> this failure? If I set up an identical Debian stable instance on
>> EC-2, am I likely to reproduce
On Apr 04, 2011, at 20:15, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:24:28AM -0500, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately it was not a trivial process to install Debian
>> "squeeze" onto an EC2 instance; it took a couple ugly Perl scripts,
>> a pa
On Apr 05, 2011, at 15:07, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:30:11AM -0500, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> Well, the base image is essentially a somewhat basic Debian "squeeze"
>> for EC2 with our SSH public keys and a couple generic customizations
>>
Ping?
Raphael, any chance we could get more discussion or agreement from the dpkg
developers regarding the "e500v2" architecture name? Both Sebastian and I
are in full agreement that the name "e500v2" most accurately describes the
fundamental architecture.
I've included the summarized rationale
On 2010/05/17 09:28, "Matthias Klose" wrote:
> On 30.04.2010 19:51, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Package: gcc-4.4
>> Version: 4.4.2-9
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: patch sid
>>
>> If "CC" is left unset, it defaults to "cc" and causes the compiler to
>> be built to run on the build system instead of on
On 2010/05/18 16:49, "Matthias Klose" wrote:
> On 18.05.2010 20:41, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> On 2010/05/17 09:28, "Matthias Klose" wrote:
>>> On 30.04.2010 19:51, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>>> Package: gcc-4.4
>>>> Version: 4.4.2-9
&g
reopen 579780
thanks
On 2010/05/18 12:45, "Debian Bug Tracking System"
wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> which was filed against the gcc-4.4 package:
>
> #579780: powerpcspe: Preliminary architecture port and minor bugfix
>
> It has been closed by Matthias K
On 2010/05/12 12:26, "Russ Allbery" wrote:
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes:
>> Package: lintian
>> Version: 2.4.1
>> Severity: wishlist
>> User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
>> Usertags: powerpcspe
>
>> Please add powerpcspe [0] to the list of valid architectures. There is
>> dpkg support
Raphael,
I believe we have consensus on the port architecture name of "powerpcspe".
Is there any chance we can get the attached patch merged soon? I'd like to
move forward with getting an unofficial debian-ports.org repository created
and they won't do that until a patch has been merged to upstre
On 2010/04/30 14:53, "Kyle D Moffett" wrote:
> On 2010/04/30 14:18, "Sebastian Andrzej Siewior"
> wrote:
>> I think you don't have to write the complete history each time. You
>> could write "new port" followed by a link to wiki page which has some
>> more informations.
>
> Good point; I'll make
On 2010/04/30 18:27, "Kurt Roeckx" wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 05:42:53PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Package: openssl
>> Version: 0.9.8m-2
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Tags: patch sid
>>
>> In order to cross-compile OpenSSL, we need to override the "CC"
>> environment variable with the target
On 2010/05/06 15:37, "Cord Beermann" wrote:
> Hallo! Du (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior) hast geschrieben:
>> Please add a mailing list for powerpcspe debian port [0]. It will handle
>> the communication for the port. We could squeeze in on the
>> debian-powe...@d.o but will have different problems, di
On 2010/03/23 18:21, "Raphael Hertzog" wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> It has the unfortunate GNU arch triplet of "powerpc-linux-gnuspe", when
>> it should have been "powerpcspe-linux-gnu" or "e500-linux-gnu". This
>> causes much the same problem and has the same solution as
On 2010/03/24 17:50, "Sebastian Andrzej Siewior"
wrote:
> * Moffett, Kyle D | 2010-03-23 17:52:57 [-0500]:
>> Ah, my apologies. I'd actually already seen that one, but wasn't paying
>> enough attention when submitting the bugreport.
>
> I saw in yo
On 2010/03/25 16:39, "Sebastian Andrzej Siewior"
wrote:
> * Moffett, Kyle D | 2010-03-24 19:28:06 [-0500]:
>> The e500v1 was never very popular and all of the available parts today
>> support double-precision floating point GPRS. With that said, I'm actually
>
ame:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 18:39:09 -0500, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>>>> * The only chipset families that support "SPE" instructions are:
>>>>* PowerPC e200
>>> e200z3 and e200z6 according to [3].
>>>>* PowerPC e500v1
On Jun 15, 2010, at 14:21, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 13:35 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Package: clp
>> Version: 1.11.1-2
>> Severity: serious
>>
>> Your package fails to build in a minimal unstable build chroot because
>> it attempts to link against -lz but does not build-
retitle 585767 Meta Bug: Convert all deps on type-handling to arch-wildcards
and remove type-handling
severity 585767 wishlist
thanks
On Jun 21, 2010, at 15:56, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 08:35:14PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> * Aurelien Jarno | 2010-06-14 12:0
On Aug 09, 2010, at 19:29, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> In particular, I'm trying to write a script that packages up a vmlinuz
> and initrd.gz from the Debian-Installer to allow them to be easily run
> unmodified in an Amazon EC2 VM (now that Amazon supports using your own
> custom kernel).
I can confirm
On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:55, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
On 08/11/2010 01:53 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 03:31 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 19:29 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Would it be possible to apply the attached Fedora/Ubuntu kernel patch
to
On Jul 02, 2010, at 11:41, Julien BLACHE wrote:
>
> I've just done a manual build on mips, and the package built just fine.
>
> So we can write the mips failure off as a buildd issue, which leaves us
> with the hppa & kfreebsd-* failures.
Hmm, I'm working on a Debian port to PowerPCSPE over at d
Hello again everyone,
I'm in the middle of doing some software testing on a pre-production
clone of this system using some modified software configurations and a
testing-only data volume, and I've managed to trigger this panic again.
The trigger was exactly the same; I had a bunch of queued email
On Jun 23, 2011, at 16:55, Sean Ryle wrote:
> Maybe I am wrong here, but shouldn't the cast be to (unsigned long) or to
> (sector_t)?
>
> Line 534 of commit.c:
> jbd_debug(4, "JBD: got buffer %llu (%p)\n",
> (unsigned long long)bh->b_blocknr
On Jun 24, 2011, at 09:46, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 23-06-11 16:19:08, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> Besides which, line 534 in the Debian 2.6.32 kernel I am using is this
>> one:
>>
>> J_ASSERT(commit_transaction->t_nr_buffers <=
>> commit_transac
On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:01, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 05:30:11PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
>>> I've found some. So although data=journal users are minority, there are
>>> some. That being said I agree with you we should do something about it
>>> - either state that we want to fully
On Jun 28, 2011, at 10:16, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>>> My basic impression is that the use of "data=journalled" can help
>>> reduce the risk (slightly) of serious corruption to some kinds of
>>> databases when the application does not provide appropriate syncs
>>> or journalling on its own (IE: such as tex
at 05:36, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 27-06-11 23:21:17, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:01, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>>> That being siad, it is true that data=journalled isn't necessarily
>>> faster. For heavy disk-bound workloads, it can be slower. So I
On Jun 28, 2011, at 18:57, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 28-06-11 14:30:55, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
>> On Jun 28, 2011, at 05:36, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> Well, direct IO is atomic in data=journal the same way as in data=ordered.
>>> It can happen only half of direct IO write
54 matches
Mail list logo
