> > > I see the listmasters have straightened this message out. I'm building
> > > gcj-4.1 on vivaldi.
> >
> > I'll try gnat-4.1 on washi.
>
> that doesn't make sense unless you did port gnat-4.1 for m68k.
That was a fast 'build', then. Didn't realize 'manual builds needed'
really meant 'porting n
> > While having built and uploaded things correctly for experimental, I
> > didn't do the same for unstable, which now needs some manual
> > intervention building gnat-4.1 and gcj-4.1.
>
> > gcj-4.1 (alpha arm m68k mips mipsel s390 sparc):
> >
> > - needs gcc-4.1_4.1.2 (not yet built on arm and m
> Since m68k pretty much depends on the gcc-4.1 transition to make it in
> again, I would suggest that we (as in, the m68k port) make the switch to
> GCC4.1 as the default already. This will allow us to verify that stuff
> actually builds and works, and to catch up with building those that fail
> w
> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:01:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > BTW, can you tell me anything about the dip in
> > http://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph2-quarter-big.png for m68k? Seems to be
> > heading in the wrong direction again for being a release candidate. I see
> > 12 buildds activel
> >
> > I think you should apply the patch, because the build daemons use gcc 3.3
> > for building the packages. I can provide an indirect test to the patch in
> > the next upload of the octave2.1 package. In the last upload, I changed a
> > CFLAG from -O1 to -O0 for m68k and the compilation succ
> > > I am just wondering if bug # 225621 (g77-3.3: sometimes generates invalid
> > > assembly code on m68k) has been noticed, since I haven't seen it mentioned
> > > anywhere on these mailing lists. Apologies if I'm being redundant.
> >
> > it needs to be rechecked using gcc-snapshot and forwarde
> > I am just wondering if bug # 225621 (g77-3.3: sometimes generates invalid
> > assembly code on m68k) has been noticed, since I haven't seen it mentioned
> > anywhere on these mailing lists. Apologies if I'm being redundant.
>
> it needs to be rechecked using gcc-snapshot and forwarded
> upstre
> > > The fontconfig segfault happens with any of the 2.1.92-2, 2.2.0-2 or
> > > 2.2.0-5 versions of fontconfig/libfontconfig on kullervo.
> >
> > Ok, that would at first glance appear to void my hypothesis; however,
> > fontconfig uses freetype, and that could have been miscompiled. Can you
>
> I
> > Indeed, all freetype/libfreetype combos did work fine with
> > libfreetype6_2.1.4-1_m68k.deb and libfreetype6_2.1.4-2_m68k.deb from the
> > apt cache.
>
> You mean fontconfig/libfreetype?
Nope, fontconfig/libfonconfig1 - any of those work as long as libfreetype
is OK.
Michael
> > The fontconfig segfault happens with any of the 2.1.92-2, 2.2.0-2 or
> > 2.2.0-5 versions of fontconfig/libfontconfig on kullervo.
>
> Ok, that would at first glance appear to void my hypothesis; however,
> fontconfig uses freetype, and that could have been miscompiled. Can you
Indeed, all fr
> > The fontconfig segfault happens with any of the 2.1.92-2, 2.2.0-2 or
> > 2.2.0-5 versions of fontconfig/libfontconfig on kullervo.
>
> Ok, that would at first glance appear to void my hypothesis; however,
> fontconfig uses freetype, and that could have been miscompiled. Can you
> try also down
> You find gcc-3.0.1-1 at http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/gcc,
> currently building on i386, powerpc and sparc (seems I crashed ipmsun1
> with the m68k build ;-) I do not plan to move it to incoming until
Something crashed the m68k box - I doubt it's related to the gcc build.
You should have mo
12 matches
Mail list logo
