Hi,
Thank you for the bug report (and patch!), I have just travelled back home
and plan on pushing a fix today after I finish work.
Cheers,
--
Steve
On 4 October 2017 at 09:04, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> This issue block slic3r-prusa from entering testing, as it break the
> armel build for t
On 28 May 2016 at 21:12, Tobias Frost wrote:
> Severity: -1 important
>
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 10:00:12 +0200 (CEST) Santiago Vila s> wrote:
> > retitle 816989 tbb: FTBFS in testing (Build killed with signal TERM
> after 150 minutes of inactivity)
> > severity 816989 serious
> > thanks
> >
> > Th
On 18 November 2015 at 18:23, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 18.11.2015 um 18:35 schrieb Steven Capper:
> > Upgrading to 227-1 caused immediate segfaults and led to the same
> > unbootable machine.
> >
> > So it looks like something introduced 227-1.
>
> I w
On 18 November 2015 at 17:20, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> Am 18.11.2015 um 16:52 schrieb Steven Capper:
> > I neglected to mention that this running under a QEMU virtual machine
> (same
> > error for both KVM acceleration on and off).
> >
> > I will
I neglected to mention that this running under a QEMU virtual machine (same
error for both KVM acceleration on and off).
I will dig into this a little bit here and will update if I find anything.
Cheers,
--
Steve
Package: systemd
Version: 227-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-- Package-specific info:
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: arm64 (aarch64)
Kernel: Linux 4.2.0-1-arm64 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Thank you for this patch Mathieu.
I've tweaked it a little bit as:
1) The semantics of __atomic_compare_exchange are a little
different to __sync_val_compare_and_swap, and my tests were failing.
2) I promoted it to gcc_generic.h as I believe this will be useful
for other architectures. :-).
Hi,
Thanks for this.
I have been able to reproduce this with tbb_4.2~20140122-5.
A new package is being worked on in experimental,
tbb_4.3~20150611-1~exp1, and this *does* compile correctly with gcc-5.
I will flag this bug as closed as soon as I upload 20150611 to Sid.
Cheers,
--
Steve
--
To
On 20 January 2015 at 10:51, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> Hello Steven,
Hi Aníbal,
>
> At IMGtech.com, we would like to support this patch for tbb.
>
> If you prefer, I could sponsor a new Debian version of tbb including
> Jurica's patch.
>
Taking a look at this patch, I would like to exper
On 30 September 2014 11:04, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Control: tags -1 patch
>
> Here is a patch which solve the symptoms. The underlying bug is within
> gcc internals where atomics operations are not implementation for
> ppc32 targets.
>
Many thanks Mathieu,
This looks good to me. I'm about to
10 matches
Mail list logo
