On Nov 12, 2011, at 15:56, Anthony Green wrote:
On 11/1/2011 4:55 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Nov 01, 2011, at 11:53, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Please consider applying.
I like this patch, and have applied it after a minor tweak (cache
cif-rtype-size in a local var to avoid multiple accesses
Hello,
The fix for GCC PR target/50906 has now been applied to gcc-4_6-branch,
so it should hopefully soon be automatically picked up in the Debian GCC
sources from that branch.
For reference, the commit log is attached below.
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
On Dec 05, 2011, at 22:47, amodra at gcc dot
Hello again!
I know it's been ages, but I finally got some time to get that patch
tested out and try additional debugging.
On Sep 01, 2011, at 11:17, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 30-08-11 19:26:22, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Aug 30, 2011, at 18:12, Jan Kara wrote:
I can still trigger it on my VM
Hello,
I have verified that gcc-4.6 and gcj-4.6 both build successfully
on powerpcspe with that patch. It turns out gcj needs to build
an embedded copy of libffi (is that OK under Debian policy?), so
I also had to apply the new libffi patch in #647288 [1].
This patch modifies a case conditional
On Nov 02, 2011, at 17:07, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 11/02/2011 04:09 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Hello,
I have verified that gcc-4.6 and gcj-4.6 both build successfully
on powerpcspe with that patch. It turns out gcj needs to build
an embedded copy of libffi (is that OK under Debian policy
On Nov 01, 2011, at 11:53, Kyle Moffett wrote:
After upgrading to a new version of GNU ld for PowerPC e500, I started
seeing build errors on e500 systems again. It turns out that the
PowerPC string instructions are unimplemented on PPC440 and most other
embedded cores, and also cause
On Oct 30, 2011, at 12:21, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
tag 644662 + moreinfo
thanks
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Source: eglibc
Version: 2.13-21
Severity: normal
Tags: upstream patch
The attached patch fixes detection of GCC -fstack-protector and libssp.
Hi Matthias,
On Oct 11, 2011, at 14:24, Matthias Klose wrote:
why use graphite at all for the stage1 build?
Well, this isn't really the stage1 build of GCC. When bootstrapping an
architecture I want to avoid rebuilding packages as much as possible,
which means that I want a final-stage GCC
On Oct 11, 2011, at 17:47, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/11/2011 10:49 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Source: gcc-4.6
Version: 4.6.1-15
Severity: wishlist
When building in REVERSE_CROSS mode (IE: when trying to build a native
compiler for another architecture with an existing cross-compiler, the
On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/05/2011 12:12 AM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: libffi
Severity: normal
Tags: patch upstream
User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
Usertags: powerpcspe
The Debian-Ports powerpcspe architecture can't currently build the
libffi package
Hi Matthias!
On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/05/2011 12:12 AM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: libffi
Severity: normal
Tags: patch upstream
User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
Usertags: powerpcspe
The Debian-Ports powerpcspe architecture can't currently build the
On Oct 08, 2011, at 17:20, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Oct 08, 2011, at 14:47, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
except that it does break the native build :-/ pretty please test cross
patches
with a native build too.
with_libgcc is unset with this patch. the
Matthias,
On Oct 10, 2011, at 04:14, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/09/2011 08:49 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Matthias Klose wrote:
I don't see this. is /usr/include/asm a symlink? is gcc-multilib the recent
version in unstable? If this is a local build, make sure that the
gcc-multiarch.diff
reassign 644764 gcc-defaults 1.107
fixed 644764 1.108
close 644764
thanks
On Oct 10, 2011, at 13:55, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/10/2011 07:52 PM, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
This build failure is for a native build of
an amd64 gcc-4.6 on an amd64 system (See the x86_64-linux-gnu paths
Hi Matthias! Thanks for your help!
On Oct 09, 2011, at 04:47, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/08/2011 10:31 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Source: gcc-4.6
Version: 4.6.1-13
Severity: serious
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the
past)
When trying to rebuild
Hi!
On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 10/07/2011 01:30 PM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
W dniu 07.10.2011 11:48, Marcin Juszkiewicz pisze:
When compiling a GCC stage1 cross-compiler, the generated control file
depends on libgcc even when one is not built, making it impossible
On Oct 08, 2011, at 14:47, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Oct 08, 2011, at 08:36, Matthias Klose wrote:
except that it does break the native build :-/ pretty please test cross
patches
with a native build too.
with_libgcc is unset with this patch. the stage stuff should go after setting
setting
On Sep 01, 2010, at 08:22, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010, Simon Richter wrote:
I just converted a package to multiarch, and dh_makeshlibs complains
about the library being gone. The library has moved to the multiarch
subdir appropriate for $(DEB_HOST_ARCH), and can be found there.
Re-sent with the correct email address for Steve (I hope), and an attached
copy of the referenced patch.
On Oct 07, 2011, at 17:01, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Sep 01, 2010, at 08:22, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010, Simon Richter wrote:
I just converted a package to multiarch, and
, Kyle D kyle.d.moff...@boeing.com
Date: October 04, 2011 18:12:27 EDT
To: Debian Bug Tracking System sub...@bugs.debian.org
Subject: libffi: Build errors on PowerPC e500, test-suite failures on PowerPC
soft-float
Package: libffi
Severity: normal
Tags: patch upstream
User: debian-powerpc
On Sep 12, 2011, at 12:04, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:56:05AM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Specifically, my patch allows you enable both password and public-key auth,
by preseeding both a password and the authorized_keys URL. If you don't
want to enable password
On Aug 30, 2011, at 18:12, Jan Kara wrote:
On Fri 26-08-11 16:03:32, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Ping?
Any more ideas for debugging this issue?
Sorry for not getting to you earlier.
That's ok, I have a workaround so it's been on my back burner for a while.
I can still trigger it on my VM
-11 11:03:52, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Jun 24, 2011, at 09:46, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 23-06-11 16:19:08, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Besides which, line 534 in the Debian 2.6.32 kernel I am using is this
one:
J_ASSERT(commit_transaction-t_nr_buffers =
commit_transaction
On Jun 28, 2011, at 10:16, Ted Ts'o wrote:
My basic impression is that the use of data=journalled can help
reduce the risk (slightly) of serious corruption to some kinds of
databases when the application does not provide appropriate syncs
or journalling on its own (IE: such as text-based Wiki
:36, Jan Kara wrote:
On Mon 27-06-11 23:21:17, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:01, Ted Ts'o wrote:
That being siad, it is true that data=journalled isn't necessarily
faster. For heavy disk-bound workloads, it can be slower. So I can
imagine adding some documentation that warns
On Jun 28, 2011, at 18:57, Jan Kara wrote:
On Tue 28-06-11 14:30:55, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Jun 28, 2011, at 05:36, Jan Kara wrote:
Well, direct IO is atomic in data=journal the same way as in data=ordered.
It can happen only half of direct IO write is done when you hit power
button
On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:01, Ted Ts'o wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 05:30:11PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
I've found some. So although data=journal users are minority, there are
some. That being said I agree with you we should do something about it
- either state that we want to fully support
On Jun 24, 2011, at 09:46, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 23-06-11 16:19:08, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Besides which, line 534 in the Debian 2.6.32 kernel I am using is this
one:
J_ASSERT(commit_transaction-t_nr_buffers =
commit_transaction-t_outstanding_credits);
Hmm, OK, so we've used
Hello again everyone,
I'm in the middle of doing some software testing on a pre-production
clone of this system using some modified software configurations and a
testing-only data volume, and I've managed to trigger this panic again.
The trigger was exactly the same; I had a bunch of queued
On Jun 23, 2011, at 16:55, Sean Ryle wrote:
Maybe I am wrong here, but shouldn't the cast be to (unsigned long) or to
(sector_t)?
Line 534 of commit.c:
jbd_debug(4, JBD: got buffer %llu (%p)\n,
(unsigned long long)bh-b_blocknr,
On Apr 04, 2011, at 20:15, Ted Ts'o wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:24:28AM -0500, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Unfortunately it was not a trivial process to install Debian
squeeze onto an EC2 instance; it took a couple ugly Perl scripts,
a patched Debian-Installer, and several manual
post
On Apr 05, 2011, at 15:07, Ted Ts'o wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:30:11AM -0500, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
Well, the base image is essentially a somewhat basic Debian squeeze
for EC2 with our SSH public keys and a couple generic customizations
applied. It does not have Postfix installed
On Apr 02, 2011, at 22:02, Ted Ts'o wrote:
Sorry for not following up sooner. Are you still able to reproduce
this failure? If I set up an identical Debian stable instance on
EC-2, am I likely to reproduce it myself? Do you have a package list
or EC2 base image I can use as a starting
On Apr 04, 2011, at 10:24, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On Apr 02, 2011, at 22:02, Ted Ts'o wrote:
Sorry for not following up sooner. Are you still able to reproduce
this failure? If I set up an identical Debian stable instance on
EC-2, am I likely to reproduce it myself? Do you have a package
Whoops, looks like the Debian bug-tracker lost the CC list somehow. I believe
I've got all the CCs re-added, sorry for any duplicate emails.
On Mar 01, 2011, at 11:52, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.32-30
Severity: important
I'm getting a repeatable BUG from ext4,
On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:55, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
On 08/11/2010 01:53 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 03:31 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 19:29 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Would it be possible to apply the attached Fedora/Ubuntu kernel patch
to Debian as
On Aug 09, 2010, at 19:29, Kyle Moffett wrote:
In particular, I'm trying to write a script that packages up a vmlinuz
and initrd.gz from the Debian-Installer to allow them to be easily run
unmodified in an Amazon EC2 VM (now that Amazon supports using your own
custom kernel).
I can confirm
On Jul 02, 2010, at 11:41, Julien BLACHE wrote:
I've just done a manual build on mips, and the package built just fine.
So we can write the mips failure off as a buildd issue, which leaves us
with the hppa kfreebsd-* failures.
Hmm, I'm working on a Debian port to PowerPCSPE over at
retitle 585767 Meta Bug: Convert all deps on type-handling to arch-wildcards
and remove type-handling
severity 585767 wishlist
thanks
On Jun 21, 2010, at 15:56, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 08:35:14PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
* Aurelien Jarno | 2010-06-14
On Jun 15, 2010, at 14:21, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 13:35 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: clp
Version: 1.11.1-2
Severity: serious
Your package fails to build in a minimal unstable build chroot because
it attempts to link against -lz but does not build-depend on
Oops, typoed the build log URL in the original bug report:
http://buildd.debian-ports.org/fetch.php?pkg=perlver=5.10.1-13%2Bb101arch=powerpcspestamp=1276371376file=logas=raw
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 2010/05/12 12:26, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior sebast...@breakpoint.cc writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 2.4.1
Severity: wishlist
User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
Usertags: powerpcspe
Please add powerpcspe [0] to the list of valid architectures.
reopen 579780
thanks
On 2010/05/18 12:45, Debian Bug Tracking System ow...@bugs.debian.org
wrote:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
which was filed against the gcc-4.4 package:
#579780: powerpcspe: Preliminary architecture port and minor bugfix
It has been closed
On 2010/05/17 09:28, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote:
On 30.04.2010 19:51, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: gcc-4.4
Version: 4.4.2-9
Severity: normal
Tags: patch sid
If CC is left unset, it defaults to cc and causes the compiler to
be built to run on the build system instead of on the
On 2010/05/18 16:49, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote:
On 18.05.2010 20:41, Moffett, Kyle D wrote:
On 2010/05/17 09:28, Matthias Klosed...@debian.org wrote:
On 30.04.2010 19:51, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: gcc-4.4
Version: 4.4.2-9
Severity: normal
Tags: patch sid
If CC is left
On 2010/05/06 15:37, Cord Beermann c...@debian.org wrote:
Hallo! Du (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior) hast geschrieben:
Please add a mailing list for powerpcspe debian port [0]. It will handle
the communication for the port. We could squeeze in on the
debian-powe...@d.o but will have different
On 2010/04/30 14:53, Kyle D Moffett kyle.d.moff...@boeing.com wrote:
On 2010/04/30 14:18, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior sebast...@breakpoint.cc
wrote:
I think you don't have to write the complete history each time. You
could write new port followed by a link to wiki page which has some
more
On 2010/04/30 18:27, Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 05:42:53PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Package: openssl
Version: 0.9.8m-2
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch sid
In order to cross-compile OpenSSL, we need to override the CC
environment variable with the target
Raphael,
I believe we have consensus on the port architecture name of powerpcspe.
Is there any chance we can get the attached patch merged soon? I'd like to
move forward with getting an unofficial debian-ports.org repository created
and they won't do that until a patch has been merged to
, Kyle D wrote:
* The only chipset families that support SPE instructions are:
* PowerPC e200
e200z3 and e200z6 according to [3].
* PowerPC e500v1
* PowerPC e500v2
* The incompatibility between various SPE-capable CPUs mean that an arch
spec of spe or powerpcspe is probably
Ping?
Raphael, any chance we could get more discussion or agreement from the dpkg
developers regarding the e500v2 architecture name? Both Sebastian and I
are in full agreement that the name e500v2 most accurately describes the
fundamental architecture.
I've included the summarized rationale for
On 2010/03/25 16:39, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior sebast...@breakpoint.cc
wrote:
* Moffett, Kyle D | 2010-03-24 19:28:06 [-0500]:
The e500v1 was never very popular and all of the available parts today
support double-precision floating point GPRS. With that said, I'm actually
not sure if my
On 2010/03/24 17:50, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior sebast...@breakpoint.cc
wrote:
* Moffett, Kyle D | 2010-03-23 17:52:57 [-0500]:
Ah, my apologies. I'd actually already seen that one, but wasn't paying
enough attention when submitting the bugreport.
I saw in your earlier bug report that you
On 2010/03/23 18:21, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Kyle Moffett wrote:
It has the unfortunate GNU arch triplet of powerpc-linux-gnuspe, when
it should have been powerpcspe-linux-gnu or e500-linux-gnu. This
causes much the same problem and has the same solution
54 matches
Mail list logo
