Bug#674728: [Pkg-chromium-maint] Bug#674728: #674728 chromium: FTBFS on armel and armhf
On 18/06/2012 00:20, shawn wrote: the skia patch here is tested and critical for armel. I am unable to test the rest cause I am having issues in the linking stage with chromium 20 with symbols that should be provided by the vpx library. I was using chromium-browser-20.0.1132.21~r139451-1 Since these problems do not seem arm-specific (even though the libvpx.gyp file has a alot of arm stuff, i think that is special to building it, which we thankfully are not doing...although we might have to suffer those issues with v8...) I wonder if you have ran into/fixed these problems. The alternate to the 0001 patch is what the libv8 package has CXXFLAGS += -mno-thumb-interwork under the armel section If i remember well, I was using a similar 0001 patch for libv8 and using that flag was a better solution. I think it poses problems with armhf builds but i'm not sure. Jérémy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#674728: [Pkg-chromium-maint] Bug#674728: #674728 chromium: FTBFS on armel and armhf
On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 12:40 +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: On 18/06/2012 00:20, shawn wrote: CXXFLAGS += -mno-thumb-interwork under the armel section If i remember well, I was using a similar 0001 patch for libv8 and using that flag was a better solution. I think it poses problems with armhf builds but i'm not sure. This flag is certainly not necessary for armhf, as that warning only triggers on armv7. https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=590 Which version did you run across it? https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5260 I just realized that even if it wasn't fixed I wouldn't run across it, because I am using armv5t, and blx is a problem for armv4t. Maybe there is some way to scan the binaries for use of the offending blx instruction? Otherwise, are any of the porterboxes armv4t that you can run the tests with thumb interworking on, to check? I'd rather not turn off features that are part of the Debian armel port just because of buggy assembly. -- -Shawn Landden -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#674728: [Pkg-chromium-maint] Bug#674728: #674728 chromium: FTBFS on armel and armhf
On 08/07/2012 17:12, shawn wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 12:40 +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: On 18/06/2012 00:20, shawn wrote: CXXFLAGS += -mno-thumb-interwork under the armel section If i remember well, I was using a similar 0001 patch for libv8 and using that flag was a better solution. I think it poses problems with armhf builds but i'm not sure. This flag is certainly not necessary for armhf, as that warning only triggers on armv7. It is not necessary indeed. I did not mean it was. https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=590 Which version did you run across it? https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5260 Recent enough :) I just realized that even if it wasn't fixed I wouldn't run across it, because I am using armv5t, and blx is a problem for armv4t. Maybe there is some way to scan the binaries for use of the offending blx instruction? Otherwise, are any of the porterboxes armv4t that you can run the tests with thumb interworking on, to check? I'd rather not turn off features that are part of the Debian armel port just because of buggy assembly. The -mno-thumb-interwork flag is needed to cover precisely the armv4t case, and is compatible with armv5t. I think you can run into troubles when using your patch on armv4t, but not on armv5t, hence using the flag without the patch is a better solution. Jérémy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
