Re: Some 'required' packages broken for powerpcspe port

2011-07-06 Thread David Kuehling
> "Sebastian" == Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes: >>> I could upload my chroot by end of the week. Is this helpful? >> >> I'm already tinkering with multistrapping a chroot from >> snapshot.debian.org (currently trying May 9 2011). If I'm lucky this >> will soon work. So now I have a doub

[PATCH] make eglibc-2.13-8 work on arch powerpcspe

2011-07-06 Thread David Kuehling
The attached debdiff makes sid's eglibc (2.13-8) work on architecture powerpcspe. We have a few new test-case errors, that are not listed in debian/testsuite-checking/expected-results-powerpc-linux-gnu-libc : bug-nextafter.out, Error 18 bug-nexttoward.out, Error 18 test-double.out, Error 1

Re: Some 'required' packages broken for powerpcspe port

2011-07-06 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
David Kuehling wrote: BTW are there any special test-cases you use for testing your changes? So far I can only imagine to put this in a chroot and see whether it "works". libc has a testsuite of its own. The only things that were failing were the same failures as for powerpc and some floatingpo

Re: Some 'required' packages broken for powerpcspe port

2011-07-06 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
David Kuehling wrote: One thing that's worth mentioning, if the GNU ld patches that Sebastian proposed got fully merged then any patches solely fixing "lwsync" issues are no longer really relevant. Specifically, GNU ld now autoconverts "lwsync" into the appropriate "msync" instruction when assem

Re: Some 'required' packages broken for powerpcspe port

2011-07-06 Thread David Kuehling
> "Sebastian" == Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes: > David Kuehling wrote: >>> One thing that's worth mentioning, if the GNU ld patches that >>> Sebastian proposed got fully merged then any patches solely fixing >>> "lwsync" issues are no longer really relevant. Specifically, GNU ld >>> now

Re: Some 'required' packages broken for powerpcspe port

2011-07-06 Thread David Kuehling
> "Kyle" == Kyle Moffett writes: >> Looks like this part is rather trivial. You still have 2 short >> patches, both of which have not gone to eglibc upstream nor into >> debian sid (as far as I can see, eglibc.org is currently down). >> >> I'll file bug reports and send you the fixed source