Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Hi, On 02/12/13 13:14, Matthias Klose wrote: Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree. - hppa, no feedback, CCing John David Anglin - ia64, no feedback, likely to be removed. - powerpc, found some feedback from the porters, but unrelated to toolchain issues, see https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2013/11/msg00050.html - powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge. Now that we have fixed gcc-4.7 and gcc-4.8 on powerpcspe, using gcc-4.8 as default compiler on powerpcspe would fine. Thanks in advance, Roland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 01:52:22AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 02.12.2013 23:20, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Hi, I don't know whether it is appropriate that I remark, I have no objection to moving to gcc-4.8 on ppc64, too. this is not a question about any objections, but about a call to the ppc64 porters if they are able to maintain such a port in Debian. There is no response yet. Hiroyuki Yamamoto is the porter behind ppc64, so please consider that as an answer. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Aurelien Jarno wrote: On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 01:52:22AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 02.12.2013 23:20, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Hi, I don't know whether it is appropriate that I remark, I have no objection to moving to gcc-4.8 on ppc64, too. this is not a question about any objections, but about a call to the ppc64 porters if they are able to maintain such a port in Debian. There is no response yet. Hiroyuki Yamamoto is the porter behind ppc64, so please consider that as an answer. Is Message #42 of Bug#731069 not enough? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=731069#42 Best Regards, -- Hiroyuki Yamamoto A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:14:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree. I had hoped to get glibc 2.17 building on Alpha before switching to gcc-4.8, but that's proving to be a rather difficult nut to crack. Assuming that there is nothing in gcc-4.8 that specially depends on the version of glibc in unstable then please default to gcc-4.8 on Alpha. Cheers Michael. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Am 02.12.2013 23:20, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Hi, I don't know whether it is appropriate that I remark, I have no objection to moving to gcc-4.8 on ppc64, too. this is not a question about any objections, but about a call to the ppc64 porters if they are able to maintain such a port in Debian. There is no response yet. I did check http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/criteria.html and apparently ppc64 is a primary release architecture, so I did make it the default for sid (and will make 4.9 the default for jessie once uploaded to unstable). Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Hi, (2013/12/04 9:52), Matthias Klose wrote: Am 02.12.2013 23:20, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Hi, I don't know whether it is appropriate that I remark, I have no objection to moving to gcc-4.8 on ppc64, too. this is not a question about any objections, but about a call to the ppc64 porters if they are able to maintain such a port in Debian. There is no response yet. Because I don't have enough skill for maintaining powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc as no trouble now, I don't know whether I may remark or not. But I will make effort to find occurring troubles and to maintain it as no trouble within my possible skill. I did check http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/criteria.html and apparently ppc64 is a primary release architecture, so I did make it the default for sid (and will make 4.9 the default for jessie once uploaded to unstable). I also think it reasonable at this moment. Best regards, -- Hiroyuki Yamamoto A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree. - hppa, no feedback, CCing John David Anglin - ia64, no feedback, likely to be removed. - powerpc, found some feedback from the porters, but unrelated to toolchain issues, see https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2013/11/msg00050.html - powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge. - ppc64, no feedback - s390x, pending upload - sparc, no feedback - sh4, no feedback, doesn't build, CCing Nobuhiro Iwamatsu Am 01.12.2013 16:45, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Source: gcc-defaults Version: 1.123 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc, because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11 on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6, ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4. And using unified version of gcc must bring happiness to many package maintainers. On the other hand, I understand that this changing depends on the correspondence status of gcc porting, so I leave decision to you. This is a decision for the porters. If there are no active porters, there shouldn't be a port. Unfortunately, building gcc-4.8 source package on sh4 has not succeeded yet, so here is a patch which changes gcc-4.8 using on ports except sh4. Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Hi! On 12/02/2013 01:14 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge. Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc, because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11 on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6, ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4. Thanks for the note! I'm actually currently working on gcc-4.8 for powerpcspe. gcc-4.7 and gcc-4.8 on powerpcspe build well, except they both don't have --with-long-double-128 activated currently (in contrast to the current default gcc-4.6 and on powerpc). --with-long-double-128 can be activated on gcc-4.7 right away. I'm filing a wishlist bug for this. For gcc-4.8, I'm still looking for a solution. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57386 I'm proposing to have gcc-4.7 as default for now with activated --with-long-double-128. As soon as GCC's #57386 is solved, gcc-4.8 can be used without problems. Roland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
I have no objection to moving to a unified version of gcc on hppa. gcc-4.8 would be my choice. On 2-Dec-13, at 7:14 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree. - hppa, no feedback, CCing John David Anglin - ia64, no feedback, likely to be removed. - powerpc, found some feedback from the porters, but unrelated to toolchain issues, see https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2013/11/msg00050.html - powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge. - ppc64, no feedback - s390x, pending upload - sparc, no feedback - sh4, no feedback, doesn't build, CCing Nobuhiro Iwamatsu Am 01.12.2013 16:45, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Source: gcc-defaults Version: 1.123 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc, because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11 on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6, ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4. And using unified version of gcc must bring happiness to many package maintainers. On the other hand, I understand that this changing depends on the correspondence status of gcc porting, so I leave decision to you. This is a decision for the porters. If there are no active porters, there shouldn't be a port. Unfortunately, building gcc-4.8 source package on sh4 has not succeeded yet, so here is a patch which changes gcc-4.8 using on ports except sh4. Regards, Dave -- John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Hi, I don't know whether it is appropriate that I remark, I have no objection to moving to gcc-4.8 on ppc64, too. Matthias Klose wrote: Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to work on the toolchain for these architectures. At least for release architectures the alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain the toolchain for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm wrong. - alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree. - hppa, no feedback, CCing John David Anglin - ia64, no feedback, likely to be removed. - powerpc, found some feedback from the porters, but unrelated to toolchain issues, see https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2013/11/msg00050.html - powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge. - ppc64, no feedback - s390x, pending upload - sparc, no feedback - sh4, no feedback, doesn't build, CCing Nobuhiro Iwamatsu Am 01.12.2013 16:45, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto: Source: gcc-defaults Version: 1.123 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc, because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11 on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6, ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4. And using unified version of gcc must bring happiness to many package maintainers. On the other hand, I understand that this changing depends on the correspondence status of gcc porting, so I leave decision to you. This is a decision for the porters. If there are no active porters, there shouldn't be a port. Unfortunately, building gcc-4.8 source package on sh4 has not succeeded yet, so here is a patch which changes gcc-4.8 using on ports except sh4. Regards, -- Hiroyuki Yamamoto A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#731069: gcc-defaults: Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc
Source: gcc-defaults Version: 1.123 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc, because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11 on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6, ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4. And using unified version of gcc must bring happiness to many package maintainers. On the other hand, I understand that this changing depends on the correspondence status of gcc porting, so I leave decision to you. Unfortunately, building gcc-4.8 source package on sh4 has not succeeded yet, so here is a patch which changes gcc-4.8 using on ports except sh4. Regards, -- Hiroyuki Yamamoto A75D B285 7050 4BF9 AEDA 91AC 3A10 59C6 5203 04DC diff -Nurd gcc-defaults-1.123.orig/debian/rules gcc-defaults-1.123/debian/rules --- gcc-defaults-1.123.orig/debian/rules 2013-07-10 01:24:13.0 +0900 +++ gcc-defaults-1.123/debian/rules 2013-12-02 00:25:31.0 +0900 @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH := $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_MULTIARCH) #gcc48_archs = alpha amd64 armel armhf hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 s390 s390x sh4 sparc sparc64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 hurd-i386 -gcc48_archs = amd64 armel armhf arm64 i386 m68k mips mipsel x32 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 hurd-i386 sparc64 +gcc48_archs = alpha amd64 armel armhf arm64 i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 s390x sparc sparc64 x32 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 hurd-i386 gcj48_archs = alpha amd64 armel armhf arm64 hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 s390 s390x sh4 sparc sparc64 x32 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 hurd-i386 # CV_XXX is the complete version number, including the release, without epoch
