Hi, On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Guo Yixuan <culu....@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Osamu Aoki <os...@debian.org> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: >> > I would rather drop any package which does use c++11 features without any >> > reflection. >> >> I now understand the problem. Thanks. >> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >> > No, just because some random c++11 thing doesn't work on armel doesn't >> > mean we drop the arch. >> > >> > What it means is packages get to work without it until it's fixed. >> >> Yes, I see. (I was wrong.) >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/727621 >> There seems to be some issue related to ATOMIC_type_LOCK_FREE. (I have >> no clue but it is related to type.) >> >> I also see FEDORA applied attached arm patch changing float to double >> and doing the alignment computing for mapped file. >> >> Is this patch something which work around the issue on armel? >> >> Also, as I see the upstream git repo, just after his release of this >> tar, he is commiting >> 5c274357ceaaff941b91e12d3f2f4714df0ecd16 >> to revert CMakeLists.txt of oldscheool branch as: >> >> -if(UNIX) >> - add_definitions("-std=c++11") >> -endif(UNIX) >> >> Then recent commit has >> + if(NOT BOOST_USE_CXX11) >> + add_definitions("-DBOOST_NO_CXX11_SCOPED_ENUMS") >> + endif() >> >> Are these kind of updates needed? >> >> Guo Yixuan, >> >> Can you talk to the upstream on this issue and what oldschool devel >> branches mean? > > This branch is intended for the compilers without full support of c++11. [1] > (Although currently it doesn't build. Perhaps we can switch to it when it's > working.) > > [1] https://code.google.com/p/rimeime/issues/detail?id=632#c1
With a confirmation from the upstream[1], I'm going to prepare an upload based on the oldschool branch, which doesn't depend on c++11 features. [1] https://code.google.com/p/rimeime/issues/detail?id=632#c7 Regards, Yixuan