Your message dated Wed, 30 Oct 2013 22:34:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#726009: fixed in yade 1.05.0-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #726009,
regarding Yade requires too much RAM for building
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Your message dated Sun, 27 Oct 2013 06:03:44 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#726009: fixed in yade 1.00.0-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #726009,
regarding Yade requires too much RAM for building
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
peter green wrote:
ia64/powerpc/s390x/sparc: unrecognized command line option
'-ftrack-macro-expansion=0'
This appears to be caused by the fact those architectures still have
gcc-4.6 as their default compiler. I see two possible fixes for this,
one is to check the gcc version and only pass th
Found 726009 1.00.0-4
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Your message dated Thu, 24 Oct 2013 19:03:49 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#726009: fixed in yade 1.00.0-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #726009,
regarding Yade requires too much RAM for building
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Found 726009 1.00.0-3
Thanks
The good news is your most recent upload made yade build on i386.
The bad news is your package is still failing to build on most archictures
including several where it has built in the past.
Release architectures where your package is out of date:
ia64/powerpc/s3
Your message dated Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:25:53 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#726009: fixed in yade 1.00.0-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #726009,
regarding Yade requires too much RAM for building
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/12/2013 07:43 PM, Anton Gladky wrote:
> Thanks all, guys, for recommendations and explanations. I will try to split
> some large cpp-files as Dmitrijs mentioned (there are a couple of them,
> which are failing reliably on weak archs), remove so
Thanks all, guys, for recommendations and explanations. I will try to
split some large cpp-files as Dmitrijs mentioned (there are a couple of
them, which are failing reliably on weak archs), remove some
optimization options as Mathieu advised and we will see, whether it helps.
I would also try to
Anton,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Anton Gladky wrote:
[...]
>> /usr/bin/c++ -Dyade_EXPORTS -g -O2 -fstack-protector
>> --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat -Werror=format-security
>> -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -DYADE_PTR_CAST=static_pointer_cast
>> -DYADE_CAST=static_cast -fPIC -DYADE_VTK -DYA
On 11 October 2013 22:34, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 09:55:34PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> [...]
>> I'm not sure, but launchpad is running 64-bit machines even when
>> compiling for the i386 architecture, and then launchpad supports PAE
>> only and thus can get >4GB of ad
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 09:55:34PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> I'm not sure, but launchpad is running 64-bit machines even when
> compiling for the i386 architecture, and then launchpad supports PAE
> only and thus can get >4GB of address space.
A 32-bit process can still only address 32-bits
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 09:55:34PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
[...]
> I'm not sure, but launchpad is running 64-bit machines even when
> compiling for the i386 architecture, and then launchpad supports PAE
> only and thus can get >4GB of address space.
[...]
Which bit of 'Physical Address Exte
On 11 October 2013 20:32, Steve Langasek wrote:
> severity 726009 serious
> thanks
>
> This remains a serious bug. Your package, which previously built on
> multiple architectures, is now failing to build due to memory exhaustion.
> While in some circumstances it is permissible to remove the old
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:32:27PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> severity 726009 serious
> thanks
>
> This remains a serious bug. Your package, which previously built on
> multiple architectures, is now failing to build due to memory exhaustion.
> While in some circumstances it is permissible t
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 726009 serious
Bug #726009 [src:yade] Yade requires too much RAM for building
Severity set to 'serious' from 'wishlist'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
726009:
severity 726009 wishlist
retitle 726009 Yade requires too much RAM for building
thanks
Hello,
thanks for bug-report. The problem is, that all build-failures are due
to insufficient RAM on build-machines [1]. I do not really know how to
"fix" that except of backlisting of some machines, as was sug
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 726009 wishlist
Bug #726009 [src:yade] yade: FTBFS on i386 (and others)
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'serious'
> retitle 726009 Yade requires too much RAM for building
Bug #726009 [src:yade] yade: FTBFS on
Source: yade
Version: 1.00.0-2
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-outdated
Hello,
yade 1.00.0-2 FTBFS on the i396 autobuilder with message:
/usr/bin/c++ -Dyade_EXPORTS -g -O2 -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat -Werror=format-security -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=
19 matches
Mail list logo
