On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:13:01PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:08:53PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > I though you said that GHCi has problems on arm. Is that related to this
> > build failure:
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=haskell-vector&arch=ar
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 01:58:31AM +0400, Alexander Danilov wrote:
> On 05.06.2013 01:13, Colin Watson wrote:
> >That's the R_ARM_V4BX problem I mentioned here:
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-haskell/2013/05/msg00054.html
> >
> >It isn't a TH failure as such, just one that comes up a lot
On 05.06.2013 01:13, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:08:53PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
I though you said that GHCi has problems on arm. Is that related to this
build failure:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=haskell-vector&arch=armel&ver=0.10.0.1-3&stamp=1369565
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:27:15PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> all very messy, with the problem now affecting non-GHCi packages.
Quite.
> I wanted to check the test suite output on armel, but the test suite
> depends on libghc-vector-dev...
>
> I guess we can simply test your patch by uploa
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 04.06.2013, 22:13 +0100 schrieb Colin Watson:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:08:53PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > I though you said that GHCi has problems on arm. Is that related to this
> > build failure:
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=haskell-vector&a
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:08:53PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> I though you said that GHCi has problems on arm. Is that related to this
> build failure:
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=haskell-vector&arch=armel&ver=0.10.0.1-3&stamp=1369565567
>
> I don’t see why GHCi would be
Hi Colin,
I though you said that GHCi has problems on arm. Is that related to this
build failure:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=haskell-vector&arch=armel&ver=0.10.0.1-3&stamp=1369565567
I don’t see why GHCi would be involved here, as there is no TH
happening.
Greetings,
Joachim
Hi,
Joachim Breitner wrote:
I am too lazy to set up my sid schroot to use locally built packages
(only my experimental schroot does that – somewhat disappointing that it
even needs manual setup), so I’ll wait for libghc-storable-complex-dev
to pass through NEW. If I don’t upload within one day a
Hi,
On 2013-06-04 13:31, Colin Watson wrote:
So a fix for this is in progress, but, of the four active powerpc
buildds, only praetorius is running 2.6.32, and the rest are on 3.2.
I've CCed the powerpc buildd admins; I don't suppose it would be
possible to upgrade praetorius?
it's DSA's call,
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 09:05:37PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 08:38:05PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > > Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > > > -- That definitely is function not implemented
> > > > SYS_344(0x5, 0xf7c7e0f0, 0xf7c7
Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 08:38:05PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > > -- That definitely is function not implemented
> > > SYS_344(0x5, 0xf7c7e0f0, 0xf7c7e110, 0x800, 0x10a0) = -1 ENOSYS
> > > (Function not implemented)
> >
>
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 08:38:05PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > -- That definitely is function not implemented
> > SYS_344(0x5, 0xf7c7e0f0, 0xf7c7e110, 0x800, 0x10a0) = -1 ENOSYS
> > (Function not implemented)
>
> >From file /usr/include/powerpc-
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> -- That definitely is function not implemented
> SYS_344(0x5, 0xf7c7e0f0, 0xf7c7e110, 0x800, 0x10a0) = -1 ENOSYS
> (Function not implemented)
>From file /usr/include/powerpc-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h
#define __NR_accept4344
Erik
--
--
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
>
> > I'll try linux-image-2.6.32-5-powerpc64_2.6.32-48_powerpc.deb but I
> > probably won't have results until tomorrow.
>
> Well I do see this problem on that kernel, but not on later ones.
>
> Strace output here:
>
> http://www.me
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> I'll try linux-image-2.6.32-5-powerpc64_2.6.32-48_powerpc.deb but I
> probably won't have results until tomorrow.
Well I do see this problem on that kernel, but not on later ones.
Strace output here:
http://www.mega-nerd.com/erikd/strace.txt.gz
I'll keep diggi
15 matches
Mail list logo