Re: ghc 9.4.7 needs some manual bootstrap on hppa

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:21:05AM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > On 2023-10-24 9:27 a.m., Adrian Bunk wrote: > > FYI: > > > > - haskell-quickcheck/hppa did FTBFS with ghc 9.4.6 due to #1052306 > > - ghc >= 9.4.7-1~exp1 uses the the Hadrian build system (due to #

Re: ghc 9.4.7 needs some manual bootstrap on hppa

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 04:01:57PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On Tue, 2023-10-24 at 16:27 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > - haskell-quickcheck/hppa did FTBFS with ghc 9.4.6 due to #1052306 > > - ghc >= 9.4.7-1~exp1 uses the the Hadrian build system (due to #1051

ghc 9.4.7 needs some manual bootstrap on hppa

FYI: - haskell-quickcheck/hppa did FTBFS with ghc 9.4.6 due to #1052306 - ghc >= 9.4.7-1~exp1 uses the the Hadrian build system (due to #1051493) - haskell-hadrian/hppa is uncompiled, blocked by haskell-quickcheck cu Adrian

Re: LibreOffice bridges/smoketest on mips(64)el (was: Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures)

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:31:29PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > Hi, > > Am 25.06.23 um 13:37 schrieb Rene Engelhard: > > > what about the > > > following: > > > - make all test failures fatal on a*64 (since upstream tests these), and > > > - make smoketest failures fatal on all architectures

Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 05:52:44AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > Hi, > > Am 19.06.23 um 23:29 schrieb Rene Engelhard: > > > The pragmatic option would be to run only a smoketest for build success > > > on architectures not tested by upstream. > > > > And have Format->Character in Impress crash

Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures

On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 11:29:34PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: >... > Am 19.06.23 um 23:19 schrieb Adrian Bunk: >... > > For such a complex package I would expect 32bit breakage in every > > release if upstream no longer tests on 32bit. > Indeed, though at least for 32bit

Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures

On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 09:31:05AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: >... > I won't be of much help here unfortunately, except > maybe testing patches, but then again there's porterboxes >... You are the only one who could realistically debug many of these. E.g. on armel it says: Fatal exception:

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Bullseye

On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 01:03:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 12/1/20 5:02 AM, YunQiang Su wrote: > > I am sorry for the later response. > >Hi, > > > > I am an active porter for the following architectures and I intend > > to continue this for the lifetime of the Bullseye release

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Bullseye

On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 01:03:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 12/1/20 5:02 AM, YunQiang Su wrote: > > I am sorry for the later response. > >Hi, > > > > I am an active porter for the following architectures and I intend > > to continue this for the lifetime of the Bullseye release

Re: Bug#845193: dpkg: recent -specs PIE changes break openssl

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 04:35:28PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: >... > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 14:52:33 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >... > > Worse, they break *differently* on whether… > > > > >Precisely to make the behavior consistent on all architectures, dpkg > > >enables PIE (conditionally if

Re: Architecture qualification meeting, scheduling

[ fullquote adding -ports, for people not following -release or -devel ] On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:35:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > Hi, > > I am arranging the final architecture qualification meeting for Stretch. > This is primarily of interest to the release team, but I will also