On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Sergei Golovan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:43 PM, wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the binary removal is the best option, if the porters are not able
>> to fix this arch-specific problem. I would like to avoid this at all
>> costs, but it might be the only available solu
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 4:54 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> --- SIGVTALRM (Virtual timer expired) @ 0 (0) ---
> rt_sigreturn() = -819
> clone(child_stack=0, flags=CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID|CLONE_CHILD_SETTID|SIGCHLD,
> child_tidptr=0x40002b28) = -513
> --- SIGVTALRM (Virtual timer e
foundation for some time.
>
> I think we do agree that it will be included into stable for the last time.
Under which metrics or evaluation process is this decision being made?
Cheers,
Carlos O'Donell
"Glibc ports maintainer for hppa"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-rele
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
> next
> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
> default
> compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
> * What is the status of the different porting efforts?
Is there a list of different porting efforts?
> * Has progress been made regarding the thread library migration?
The thread library migration code is complete, and passes the
testsuite wit
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:34 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> > * Has progress been made regarding the thread library migration?
>>
>> The thread library migration code is complete, and passes the
>> testsuite without regression, including a bespoke testsuite I wrote to
>> verify the compatibility code
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> The only issue I've been aware of so far was the ruby build problem.
> If there are others, they need more publicity I think. OTOH, ISTR
> Carlos said most of the problems could go away with the transition to
> NPTL. Might be worth a try...
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 7:15 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> >> No idea. Do you have a log?
>
> http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/hppa/daily/
>
> Problems all appear to be w/ dpkg.
>
> build_netboot.log has this:
> Unpacking console-keymaps-at (from udebs/console-keymaps-at.udeb) ...
> *** glibc detec
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Brian Szymanski wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
> i don't dispute this, but i do find it anomalous/interesting that the ia64
> and hppa trajectories match *precisely*. that is, every time the ia64 build
> percent goes up in a given interval, so does that of hppa. every t
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:49 AM, dann frazier wrote:
>> The transition plan has only been discussed verbally between Aurelian
>> and myself. In one week the 2.10 release comes out, and I plan to hand
>> Aurelian a new set of patches for debian to include. At this point
>> NPTL is officially turne
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:08:37PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> On 06/16/2009 08:25 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>> On 15/06/09 at 11:31 -0600, Grant Grundler wrote:
>>> PS: if you want an HPPA-specific issue to play with,
>>> http://experimen
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:08:37PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> On 06/16/2009 08:25 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>> On 15/06/09 at 11:31 -0600, Grant Grundler wrote:
>>> PS: if you want an HPPA-specific issue to play with,
>>> http://experimen
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 1:19 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
> Carlos, what do you think?
I think the dynamic linker is always the first to touch the mmap'd
file and therefore the most likely to fail if something is wrong in
our VM layer.
Cheers,
Carlos.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:07 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
> After staring at the dynamic loader code for a while, I think the following
> mmap call in dl-load.c doesn't correctly map the info data for
> /lib/libdl.so.2.
>
> /* Remember which part of the address space this object uses. */
>
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:28 AM, John David
Anglin wrote:
> Not that I am aware of. The situation is essentially the reverse of
> the above. Data is written from a region of memory. Then, in another
> instance of gcc, it needs to be mmap'ed back to the same location in
> memory. In theory, it co
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> da...@penalosa:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> cpu family : PA-RISC 2.0
> cpu : PA8700 (PCX-W2)
> cpu MHz : 750.00
> model : 9000/785/J6700
> model name : Duet W2
>
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 12:21 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
>> So if I characterise the problem you think you're seeing: on mmap of a
>> file at a memory location to be determined by the kernel, a sequential
>> set of reads of the mapped location eventually turns up a zero where
>> there should be da
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:07 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
> I would guess that the loop terminated early because the l_info array
> is all zeros except for the first NEEDED entry. It appears correct. The
> loop might have terminated early because of a cache issue, or possibly
> the value loaded fr
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I have just included these patches in the eglibc-2.10 branch of our SVN,
> though currently the linuxthreads version is still built by default.
>
> I got the following regressions in the NPTL build compared to the
> linuxthreads build:
> | En
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> You know your porters mailing list best, but I want to highlight some of
> the issues:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2009/07/msg2.html
I can't comment on this issue. I hope Dave can?
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2009/07
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 1:44 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> > You know your porters mailing list best, but I want to highlight some of
>> > the issues:
>> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2009/07/msg2.html
>>
>> I can't comment on
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:14 PM, John David
Anglin wrote:
>> End of assembler dump.
>> (gdb) p/x $r21
>> $2 = 0x1
>
> From the values in the core dump and the code, I calculate that r21
> should contain the value 0x40368880. So, it seems another instance
> of cache corruption. However, in this cas
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> Or are you simply asking the hppa porters to be more active in filing
>> FTBFS bugs against packages after build failures?
>
> If they would do that, that might be quite helpful to distinguish
> between "hppa issue" and "package issue".
I d
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Marc
Brockschmidt wrote:
> As announced on dda [RT1], we want to get an impression when releasing
> Squeeze is feasible. We have proposed a (quite ambitious) freeze in December
> 2009, and some developers have noted that their planned changes wouldn't be
> possible
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Carlos O'Donell (car...@systemhalted.org) [090819 14:56]:
>> I didn't know vlc, xmms2, and xmp were not building. I'll add them to
>> my list and look over the failures. I don't know how to get visibil
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> As an current exmaple, take the libcdio-transition. This transition
> needs to have updated packages xmms2, xmp and vlc. However, the
> packages are out-of-date on hppa, and for this reason cannot enter
> testing (and they depend on an old lib
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Frans Pop wrote:
>> Good. I might still break this package because libcdio is blocking
>> lots of binNMUs, and we need to try to keep transitions as small as
>> possible, but of course as soon as this package is fixed it's welcome
>> to get in sync (and if you need
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
> Did I miss a plan or was there no real plan written down?
> I'm especially thinking of some kind of milestones and deadlines about
> the nptl transition and the buildd kernel problems.
> AFAIK the nptl transition is currently being tested, though w
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>>
>>> Some of the buildd kernels still cause segfaults, it would be good to
>>> have an idea what's been done for them and how long you estimate it to
>>> take to solve them.
>>
>> No
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> As the glibc hppa ports maintainer I can commit to the following NPTL
> transition plan:
>
> * August 30th, completed NPTL rewrite to support debian partial upgrades.
> * August 31st to September 19th testing includin
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 11:53 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> We have been running with UP kernels for quite some time, and they
> haven't proven to be any more stable. Most recently I've upgraded
> peri/penalosa to 2.6.31-rc6-based kernels since they were inclusive of
> the various changes I was pointed
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 1:06 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> I think the way forward is:
>> * You get me a console trace.
>> * I give you an instrumented kernel/initrd.
>> * Repeat.
>
> *nod*
Trimming CC.
> fyi, now that I've started logging the console, penalosa has become
> strangely stable:
>
> da.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:06 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> lafayette is hosted by Thibaut @ ESIEE - I'm not sure what hardware it
> is or what kernel it runs. It only does security builds as I
> understand it, which should keep the load relatively low.
Thibaut indicates that this machine may be doing
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:11 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:06 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> > lafayette is hosted by Thibaut @ ESIEE - I'm not sure what hardware it
>> > is
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> Where is sarti physically located? Has there been an attempt to revive it?
>
> yes, its dead. we asked the local admin recently to decommission it.
Has debian asked the original sponsors for a replacement machine?
Cheers,
Carlos.
--
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 10:44 PM, LaMont Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:35:00PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
>>> That would prevent it from getting uploaded, but won't that package
>>> get marked as built, preventing other buildds
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:01 PM, LaMont Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:06 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> What happened to sarti? Loosing a box like that would certainly add
>> load to the others.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> As from release team point of view, it is necessary that there is a plan
> how hppa can and will return in the forseeable future to normal mode of
> operation, i.e. there are not many issues with e.g. architecture specific
> build failures.
>
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> After about a week of loaded uptime, penalosa returned to instability
> over the weekend.
>
> It began with an Illegal instruction leading to a panic:
> http://people.debian.org/~dannf/penalosa/penalosa.0
>
> I then rebooted it, and the conso
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:56 PM, dann frazier wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 03:36:48PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM, dann frazier wrote:
>> > After about a week of loaded uptime, penalosa returned to instability
>> > over the
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Things have become better, I'd like to thank you for that.
Thanks!
> There are still more issues with hppa popping up than with other
> architectures, but the general direction looks promising. For this
> reason, we have decided that we try
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Carlos O'Donell:
>
>> The nptl enabled hppa libc packages are in experimental.
>> e.g.
>> apt-get -t experimental install libc6
>
> Out of curiosity, does this version support cross-process mutexes?
Yes,
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:29 AM, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
>> What's the status of fixing the issues that caused this and how long do
>> you think this will continue?
>
> i suppose the cause is bug #554574 which lets apt unusable. installing
> previous release of libstdc++6 4.4.2-1 makes apt work a
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Andreas Barth (a...@not.so.argh.org) [091007 14:43]:
>> There are still more issues with hppa popping up than with other
>> architectures, but the general direction looks promising. For this
>> reason, we have decided that we try to avoid th
On 4/12/07, Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also for hppa and glibc 2.6, if we are not able to build it linuxthreads
+ TLS support, we will have to switch to NPTL, and that *may* mean a
libc transition. We are still waiting for more information from the
upstream hppa porters.
The hppa
the architecture
> for the lenny release, use another (which?) compiler version, drop
> gcj/java support, or fix things)?
Cheers,
Carlos O'Donell
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Carlos O'Donell writes:
> > > - gij/gcj shows bus errors on hppa (either 4.2 or 4.3).
> >
> > Has gij/gcj ever worked on hppa-linux?
>
> at least the gij/gcj before addi
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Carlos O'Donell a écrit :
>
> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> For all ports besides alpha and hppa we plan to make GCC-4.3
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have tried to build the glibc with GCC 4.3 on hppa, and rpcgen
> segfaults when it is used, so the build fails. I haven't start to
> investigate the problem (I started by the architectures where the
> problems were m
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 02:08:25PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 01:54:38PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 02:31:55PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > As many of you may know on some machines users will need to install
> > > a current kernel b
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:02 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
> Hi Aurelien,
>
>
> On 18-Jun-13, at 6:05 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
>> This is true that they have recently contacted me through another email
>> address, but I haven't found time to work on that. Just stay tuned.
>
>
> That's great news
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> glibc 2.19 has changed the libc ABI on s390, more specifically the
> setjmp/longjmp functions [1] [2]. Symbol versioning is used to handle
> some cases, but it doesn't work when a jmp_buf variable is embedded
> into a structure, as it change
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:14:42PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > glibc 2.19 has changed the libc ABI on s390, more specifically the
>> >
53 matches
Mail list logo
