Hey Andreas, On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 02:06:44AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > >what is the SRM opinion on the armel/armhf alignment bugs that are >exposed by building/running on 64-bit hardware that does not fix up >misaligned accesses? > >https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=alignment;[email protected] > >The fixed bugs in this list are currently > >* fixed in buster (adios, mash, coturn) >* fixed in sid (pywavelets, ndpi, nsis, ruby-ferret) >* RMed from sid (pythonqt) > >Is it worth fixing them in buster point releases (i.e. are 32-bit arm >buildds running on 64-bit hardware something that will be needed during >the buster life cycle)? Or should we tag them 'buster-ignore'? (I think >tagging them 'bullseye sid' would be wrong.)
/me recognises that list! In terms of building updated packages for buster, I'd recommend switching to either the existing 32-bit build machines or VMs running 32-bit kernels. I think we should have enough hardware coverage to be able to do that. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [email protected] "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell
