Bug#836599: RE: Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-11-25 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:36:52 + Dejan Latinovic wrote: Control: tags -1 + patch Control: user -1 debian-m...@lists.debian.org Control: usertags -1 mips-patch Hi Ghislain, I have updated the patch that reduces optimization level with requested information, Fix-build-on-MIPS.patchý. Do you

Processed (with 2 errors): RE: Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-10-18 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + patch Bug #836599 [src:shark] shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors Added tag(s) patch. > user -1 debian-m...@lists.debian.org Unknown command or malformed arguments to command. > usertags -1 mips-patch Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.

Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-10-18 Thread Dejan Latinovic
Control: tags -1 + patch Control: user -1 debian-m...@lists.debian.org Control: usertags -1 mips-patch Hi Ghislain, I have updated the patch that reduces optimization level with requested information, Fix-build-on-MIPS.patch‎. Do you want me to add anything else? Maybe it would be enough to ap

Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-10-14 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
Hi Dejan, Thanks for investigating the build issue of shark with mips and for providing patches. Please consider updating these patches with an appropriate DEP3 header [1], otherwise I can't accept them. [1] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/ One thing I also wonder is how I will know when to dro

Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-10-14 Thread Dejan Latinovic
Hi, I after further investigation I have discovered that this address (a1+v0) is valid in pure 32-bit system, but if we have 32-bits Debian on 64-bits machine the address is not valid. This happens because compiler for some reason counting on overflow in address calculation. Kernel does not co

Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-09-15 Thread Dejan Latinovic
Hello, I took a look at this issue. The reason of an illegal instruction is related to ldxc1 instruction. > ldxc1 $f0,v0(a1) > (gdb) p/x $a1 > $50 = 0xaaa8ae10 > (gdb) p/x $v0 > $51 = 0xaaaf0248 The address (a1+v0) seems to be valid and aligned to 8, but causes error anyway. I will investigate

Bug#836599: shark: FTBFS on mips/mipsel: test errors

2016-09-04 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
Source: shark Version: 3.1.3+ds1-1 Severity: serious Your package failed to build on mips/mipsel: 95% tests passed, 8 tests failed out of 163 Logs at https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=shark&suite=unstable Emilio -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainer