On Sun, May 01, 2022 at 12:59:27AM +0800, Bo YU wrote: > On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 12:44 AM tony mancill <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, May 01, 2022 at 12:39:02AM +0800, Bo YU wrote: > > > > Thank you for the bug report and the patch. I will perform an upload > > of > > > > this package soon. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > I will try to send the patch for upstream also ;) > > > > Thank you! Note that the Debian package is quite a bit behind upstream, > > so I wonder whether the patch is even necessary against upstream version > > 1.3.0. (I have not checked yet.) > > > If i am not wrong: > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-daemon.git;a=blob_plain;f=src/native/unix/support/apsupport.m4;hb=HEAD > > It seems that commons-daemon > <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-daemon.git;a=blob_plain;f=src/native/unix/support/apsupport.m4;hb=HEAD> > upstream > did not support riscv64. > > Hmm, another story, in pabs review, deleting the architecture detection > altogether is a better option from debian-riscv IRC channel talking about > it. > if so, this will push upstream to change a lot first i think. And i am not > family with the build system, maybe the java lang build does not > detect on which arch buildng?
The Debian commons-daemon source package generates (2) binary packages: Package: libcommons-daemon-java Architecture: all Package: jsvc Architecture: any So the jsvc package is architecture-specific. I will start with applying your patch against the current source version in Debian and then look at the upgrade. Regards, tony
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
