On 29 August 2011 14:05, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I've cherry-picked it now from master.
Hi Guillem,
any news on this bug? The list of packages in auto-not-for-us for
armhf keeps growing because of this bug :)
http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/architecture.php?a=armhf&suite=unstable
Could yo
On 14 March 2011 10:47, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
>
>> To cut the long story short, I agree with Steve's proposal on this:
>>
>> arm-linux-gnueabi_hf
>
> What is the purpose of the underscore? In other words, what is the
>
After a short discussion with Steve and later with Guillem on IRC,
I think it's time to make a final decision about this issue.
To cut the long story short, I agree with Steve's proposal on this:
arm-linux-gnueabi_hf
If we all agree on this, let's please have a dpkg release with the final armhf
ething
totally irrelevant.
Konstantinos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_%28name%29)
On 17 February 2011 22:19, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I really would like to know t
s the same
functionality- is absolutely needed for the port to actually exist and evolve.
I would really appreciate a reply.
Regards
Konstantinos Margaritis
Genesi USA, Senior Software engineer, armhf port maintainer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a su
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 17:01:18 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> 3. libtheora, well that's a known issue in gcc LP: #605255, I'm rebuilding
> gcc today probably and I'll retry again
>
> 12. isc-dhcp fails to build, I didn't patch it at all but i
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 17:01:18 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> 9. elinks build breaks with this error: http://paste.debian.net/82207/
> I can't build aptitude without elinks, so if anyone has an idea about that
> I'd appreciate it.
Both elinks and aptitude were fixed,
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 17:01:18 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> 11. klibc: I modified the source to tune for armv7-a but it still fails to
> build: http://paste.debian.net/82212/ (which as I found, used to occur with
> klibc in ubuntu, LP: #534281). This probably has to do with
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 19:23:51 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> Yup, and doxygen fails. In fact I am amazed that this actually builds on
> other platforms properly, it appears that it build-deps on libqt4-dev, but
> Makefile.doxywizard is configured for qt3:
I patched doxyg
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 17:01:18 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> There are a few things left to do yet:
>
> 1. binutils, I'm using the ubuntu package right now as the debian one
> doesn't yet compile, I guess I'll need some CodeSourcery arm hardfp
> backport
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 17:01:18 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> Mono seems to build though
Correction, mono does not build:
http://paste.debian.net/82215/
> I might have forgotten some packages here in the list, if I find something
> else, I'll post another mail.
Yup, and
Hi all,
After a LOT of compiling and patching around, I have a armhf repo ready [1]
and a simple tarball from debootstrap in case one wants to try the stuff [2].
In short, I have ~3000 packages built at the time of writing this, and more
are building as we speak. Though it will not cover (yet)
On Monday 19 July 2010 22:51:42 Hector Oron wrote:
> But the question is why would you run 'armel' binaries on 'armhf'
> architecture (outside a chroot - within multiarch qualified paths) as
> a user (not developing or building for 'armel'), which is the use case
> of being able to run 'armel' bina
On Monday 19 July 2010 21:02:32 Hector Oron wrote:
> In 'armhf' case $ gcc -dumpmachine spits the same GCC tuplet (unless
> we use GCC vendor tag as an ABI tag)
> But `dpkg' do not mach quadruplet names, not yet... ;-)
It does now... :)
I had to modify in particular scripts/Dpkg/Arch.pm and script
On Thursday 15 July 2010 21:06:52 Paul Brook wrote:
> Not quite. It provides a mechanism for selecting different routines without
> the runtime overhead of a check on every call. It effecitvely provides a
> hook into the dynamaic linker that allows you to decide which function to
> export for a
On Thursday 15 July 2010 19:48:43 Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Note that the new alternative to hwcap is called "multiarch" in the GNU
> libc (something totally different than "multiarch" in Debian). It allows
> to provide different versions of a given symbol using an IFUNC symbol
> type. This will be r
o denote that the port is strictly for cpus that do include a vfp (as
Matt said before in this list, armelhf though it sounds really nice, it still
is not clear whether it supports vfp, fpa, etc.).
Regards
Konstantinos Margaritis
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@l
On Thursday 08 July 2010 14:06:58 Guillem Jover wrote:
> Actually, this only seems to me to indicate the option that Aurelien
> was mentioning (building few core packages with softfp) should be strongly
> considered instead of adding a whole new architecture, which didn't look
> had been properly e
On Tuesday 06 July 2010 20:45:33 Paul Brook wrote:
> Debian is pure soft-float (i.e. -mfloat-abi=soft).
Right, all the more reason for a new flavour then :)
> -mfloat-abi=soft and -mfloat-abi=softfp are binary compatible (objects and
> libraries can be freely mixed). Obviously softfp code will wi
On Tuesday 06 July 2010 20:30:13 Hector Oron wrote:
...
> some preliminary results gave me 20-25% speed increase on exactly the same
> software/hardware configuration (eg. glxgears on software mesa reports 145
> fps vs 120 fps).
Just one comment, some more benchmarking [1] revealed ~35% speed
On Κυριακή 28 Αύγουστος 2005 12:52, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> It's an interesting question, certainly; to my mind I don't think
> it's any scarier to dump a scary english message or a scary french
> one. The added advantage to translating them is that the user
> might have the skill to know wha
(no need to cc, as I read -i18n)
On Τρίτη 14 Ιούνιος 2005 08:28, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> At the disk of being confrontational, I actually don't agree with
> either of you. I think it's important that the English messages in
> dpkg be good, clear English. I do not believe that this should be
Wrt to the msgid:
gobble replaced file `%.255s'
I find the word 'gobble' highly untranslatable, at least not without
choosing a synonym. While I understand that for native English
speakers it's hard not to use computer slang, choosing such words for
program messages, makes it quite hard for tr
23 matches
Mail list logo
