On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 01:15:38PM -0400, Jon Bernard wrote: > On the buildd machines that I cannot test on, autoconf sets $host_cpu to > 'sparc' > instead of 'sparc64'. This caused me to assume they had a 32bit kernel. On > the > machine that I can test on (smetana), autoconf sets $host_cpu correctly to > 'sparc64' - and so liburcu builds and runs fine there. > > The buildd machines are distinctly different from smetana.
I think this is because the buildds set the personality to be 32-bit as to always build for 32-bit sparc ports, no matter the running kernel of the buildd. This is just an interpretation of the effect I'm seeing, I can't back this up with a pointer to the code :) I think using $host_cpu for what liburcu uses it is flawed in this sense (also, host? why not target?). I could be wrong though, I don't claim to be an expert on such things. I'd suggest contacting the porter people and in particular the sparc porters. > I had previously mapped 'sparc' to 'sparc64' to fix this, which caused > everything to build successfully. But without testing, I didn't feel it was > the > correct thing to do, so I removed the patch. This is why the build stopped > working - not due to upstream changes. Yeah, I think this is the wrong way to go. The current sparc port only support 64-bit kernels, so it'd probably work on all cases, but it's not right to use 64-bit asm on a 32-bit userland port. > Without access to one of those machines to test on, I have two options: I have access to schroeder and can assure you that there's no difference whatsoever between the two. But try running "linux32 dpkg-buildpackage" if you want to emulate this. BTW, configure.ac seems to make some assumptions about ARM optimization falgs; I'm unsure if these are correct for Debian, you should double-check if you haven't already. Regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
