Wookey dixit:
>And it worked beatifully. Thanks.
Nice!
>I'll try doing openjdk-20 next.
You’ll want 21 as 20 has not got the t64 treatment.
gl hf,
//mirabilos
--
15:41⎜ Somebody write a testsuite for helloworld :-)
On 2024-03-27 22:30 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >OK, got those. but that's just binaries. It was the source changes I
> >was looking for (or did I misunderstand and you didn't actually make
> >any of those?),
>
> Yes, I did not make any source changes. These were the last binaries
> from
Hi Wookey,
>OK, got those. but that's just binaries. It was the source changes I
>was looking for (or did I misunderstand and you didn't actually make
>any of those?),
Yes, I did not make any source changes. These were the last binaries
from before the t64 transition (I downloaded the .deb files
On 2024-03-27 15:27 +, Wookey wrote:
> On 2024-03-26 22:28 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> > I hacked that, and I tried to do armel and armhf as well but
> > dak stopped me, whereas mini-dak was not as strict.
>
> What was the actual problem with uploading the images you built? Just
> not
On 2024-03-26 22:28 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> I hacked that, and I tried to do armel and armhf as well but
> dak stopped me, whereas mini-dak was not as strict.
What was the actual problem with uploading the images you built? Just
not having any corresponding source? Or something more
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Wookey wrote:
>I looked at this last week, but got stuck because openjdk-17's
>build-deps included graphviz
Build-Depends-Indep: graphviz, pandoc
You don’t need that. Use dpkg-checkbuilddeps -B, or manual
inspection of the .dsc (packages.d.o does show the difference
between
On 2024-03-26 10:35 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> It seems that some of the dependency chains for packages that are still
> waiting to be rebuilt on armel,armhf now end at openjdk-17, which is the
> default Java version for most architectures and Build-Depends on itself
> (with an alternative
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>Nothing beats a native compile in your basement.
Yes, definitely.
>> Do they run stock Debian armhf?
>
>So the CubieTruck is embarrassingly down level:
Oofff…
>The Wandboard is doing better:
Right, close enough anyway.
>I don't mind shipping to
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:44 PM Thorsten Glaser
wrote:
>
> I’m answering back from the $dayjob address because Googlemail
> cannot communicate with normal mailservers.
>
> >I can send you two dev boards, if you want them. The first is
> >Wandboard Dual (Cortex-A9, ARMv7 with NEON), and the second
Hi Jeffrey,
I’m answering back from the $dayjob address because Googlemail
cannot communicate with normal mailservers.
>I can send you two dev boards, if you want them. The first is
>Wandboard Dual (Cortex-A9, ARMv7 with NEON), and the second is
>CubieTruck 5 (Cortex-A7, ARMv7 with NEON and
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 6:30 PM Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> The options for the armel/armhf porters are to either get the
> .debs from me, install them in a chroot, and then the other B-D,
> and rebuild the packages, or to use dpkg --force-depends to
> install the dependencies (which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA384
Hi,
>In the -ports world, hppa doesn't have Java anyway, while m68k, powerpc
>and sh4 seem to have had a re-bootstrap at some point; so I think it's
>only the release architectures armel and armhf that have a problem here.
I hacked that, and I
It seems that some of the dependency chains for packages that are still
waiting to be rebuilt on armel,armhf now end at openjdk-17, which is the
default Java version for most architectures and Build-Depends on itself
(with an alternative dependency on openjdk-16, but that no longer exists).
13 matches
Mail list logo
