(Switched back to my main address, accidentally switched to GMail) On 4/1/20 5:05 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: >> So, the currently only candidate for this scenario is mipsel and I think this >> is a risk that is bearable, in particular since upstream considers 32-bit >> mips >> one of the supported architectures unlike alpha and hppa. > > There is also armel that you added recently (I don’t know how supported > it is by upstream).
ARMv5 is actually the default baseline that upstream supports. A patch by me to raise the baseline for ARM was rejected by Stas. >> In the worst case, you will have to file a removal bugs for sbcl on mipsel >> if upstream is really unwilling to fix the build issue on mipsel which I >> don't >> think is the case. I have had a lot of interaction with Doug Kratzman from >> sbcl upstream and he is usually very responsive. >> >> I will help with the package in any case. > > Note that several reverse build-dependencies of sbcl (e.g. pgloader) > would have to be removed as well. Good point, but I think the list isn't too long: Checking reverse dependencies... # Broken Depends: buildapp: buildapp [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 ppc64el] # Broken Build-Depends: apt-dpkg-ref: sbcl buildapp: sbcl cafeobj: sbcl cffi: sbcl cl-alexandria: sbcl cl-asdf: sbcl cl-unicode: sbcl pgcharts/non-free: sbcl (>= 1.2.0) pgloader: sbcl (>= 1.1.13) stumpwm: sbcl > In any case, thanks for your commitment to helping with portability. > I’m going to apply the patch attached to the present bug in the next > upload. Thanks and you're welcome. I enjoy fixing these portability issues. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913