On 12/22/2016 12:36 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Could you please remove the ada-m68k.diff patch from the gcc-7
> source package now. It's existence still breaks the build, it has
> been merged upstream now as already discussed.
>
> Ada is currently is disabled on gcc-6 and gcc-7 anyway,
Hi Matthias!
On 12/05/2016 12:42 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> gcc upstream just merged the patch after I had to modify it [1].
>>
>>
>>> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=243247
>
> Ah, there is no gcc-7 branch yet. So we actually won't need this
> patch but ju
On 12/04/2016 06:33 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> OK, attaching the updated patch which applies cleanly.
gcc upstream just merged the patch after I had to modify it [1].
Attaching the updated version.
Thanks,
Adrian
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=243247
-
On 12/05/2016 12:32 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 12/04/2016 06:33 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> OK, attaching the updated patch which applies cleanly.
>
> gcc upstream just merged the patch after I had to modify it [1].
>
>
>> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revis
On 12/04/2016 06:26 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Dez 04 2016, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
>
>> So I assume we can strip the patch from the changes in s-memory.adb and
>> s-memory.ads?
>
> Yes.
OK, attaching the updated patch which applies cleanly.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian
On Dez 04 2016, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> So I assume we can strip the patch from the changes in s-memory.adb and
> s-memory.ads?
Yes.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something com
On 12/04/2016 04:43 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> However, I'm by no means an Ada expert to be able to tell whether we still
> need
> Ada.Unchecked_Conversion anymore. I have glimpsed over PR48835 and I'm not
> sure
> whether this confirms this in any way.
Ah, I assume you were talking
On 12/04/2016 02:38 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Dez 04 2016, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
>
>> @Andreas: Are you sure the patch is no longer necessary?
>
> I didn't say that.
Ok, this was a misunderstanding then as you meant earlier that "this" is no
longer necessary. But I assume you
On Dez 04 2016, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> @Andreas: Are you sure the patch is no longer necessary?
I didn't say that.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different
On 12/04/2016 01:11 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Dropping ada-m68k.diff fixes this particular issue for me.
> m68k-revert-pr45144.patch
> is currently not applied because we have disabled Ada on m68k by adding it to
> ada_no_cpus in debian/rules.defs because of #814221 [1].
Hmm, so I ju
Hi Matthias!
On 12/03/2016 11:56 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Adrian, I would appreciate if you could look at a package first before calling
> for actions, and then ask a complete question. We also have the
> m68k-revert-pr45144 patch in the build which apparently needs some decision.
Dropping ada
On 03.12.2016 22:04, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 12/03/2016 10:02 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>> patching file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 47.
>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 113 (offset 13 lines).
>>> 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
>>> patc
On Dez 03 2016, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> patching file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 47.
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 113 (offset 13 lines).
> 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
> patching file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.ads
According to PR48835, thi
On 12/03/2016 10:02 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> patching file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 47.
>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 113 (offset 13 lines).
>> 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.adb
>> patching file src/gcc/ada/s-memory.ads
>
> According to PR48835,
Control: tags -1 moreinfo help
sure, please update it. It can't be applied unconditionally because it breaks
the build on other architectures.
On 03.12.2016 21:30, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Source: gcc-7
> Version: 7-20161201-1
> Severity: normal
> User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
> Us
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo help
Bug #846872 [src:gcc-7] gcc-7: FTBFS on m68k - fails to apply ada-m68k.diff
patch
Added tag(s) moreinfo and help.
--
846872: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=846872
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
Source: gcc-7
Version: 7-20161201-1
Severity: normal
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: m68k
Hi!
gcc-7 currently fails to build from source because one of the patches
shipped in the source package don't apply properly [1]:
Applying patch ada-m68k.diff
patching file src/gcc/ada/gcc-inter
17 matches
Mail list logo
