git layout for clisp [was Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs]

2017-10-21 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Hi, On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:13:35PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 09:22:07AM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > > > BTW, the git repository of clisp packaging is rather complex with many > > > different branches (even one branch per release recently), making the > >

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-25 Thread Sébastien Villemot
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 09:22:07AM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > BTW, the git repository of clisp packaging is rather complex with many > > different branches (even one branch per release recently), making the > > git-buildpackage workflow uneasy. > > My workflow predates a lot of the tooling

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-25 Thread Peter Van Eynde
Hello Sébastien, > BTW, the git repository of clisp packaging is rather complex with many > different branches (even one branch per release recently), making the > git-buildpackage workflow uneasy. My workflow predates a lot of the tooling available now... I could not find another way of having

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-24 Thread Sébastien Villemot
On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 08:20:08PM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > I was just refraining from pulling the trigger too fast, because I am not > > familiar with the rules within the Debian CL team (strong or weak package > > ownership, need to wait for peer reviews…). > _very_ weak ownership, if

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-24 Thread Peter Van Eynde
Hello Sébastien, >> - do you want me to do the upload itself? > > I am actually happy to do it myself, so I am going to do it soon. > > I was just refraining from pulling the trigger too fast, because I am not > familiar with the rules within the Debian CL team (strong or weak package > ownershi

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-23 Thread Sébastien Villemot
On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 05:38:37PM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > I checked your patches and they look good. Two questions: > > - did you give them to ‘upstream’ already? Yes, as documented in the patch headers. One has already been incorporated (after some enhancements) in the mercurial tree;

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-23 Thread Peter Van Eynde
Hello Sébastien, I checked your patches and they look good. Two questions: - did you give them to ‘upstream’ already? - do you want me to do the upload itself? Best regards, Peter signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP ___ pkg-common-

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-21 Thread Sébastien Villemot
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 06:49:53PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > The patch does not however solve the build failure on mips and s390x. These > two > archs are big-endian, so this is probably a hint. I am going to investigate > that. I have pushed a patch that fixes the FTBFS on mips. It was

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-19 Thread Sébastien Villemot
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 08:29:49PM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > I am not yet a member of the pkg-common-lisp group on Alioth, so I can't > > push > > these changes. Please do so at your convenience (or even better, accept me > > in > > the group!). > > This is strange as I accepted you a w

Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs

2017-09-17 Thread Peter Van Eynde
Hello Sébastien, > I attach a patch that fixes the build failure of clisp on i386, armel, armhf > and mipsel (I verified that on porterboxes). Oh great! This was on my (very long) to-do list. > I am not yet a member of the pkg-common-lisp group on Alioth, so I can't push > these changes. Please