Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52a4efc6.1060...@gmail.com
Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131208214322.ga18...@hall.aurel32.net
Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKnv5p8++z-xGjLMJ15nBv=1nwq9fkpds+qmjqiu8dk4ztb...@mail.gmail.com
Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/529e7cc6.1030...@debian.org
Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/529d07ae.6010...@gmail.com
Re: 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-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/529c7999.2040...@debian.org
