Hi Muri,
With qemu-user-static binfmt-support and debootstrap you can establish
a Debian root filesystem of any architecture supported by QEMU. Then
you chroot into the directory and you basically entered a
not-so-perfect virtual environment. You can test yout packages there.
By following the
hi,
On 09/06/2016 12:44 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
[...]
> I didn't think about adding -latomic to the linker flag list
> directly via -Wl. I just tested your suggestion and it's really
> funny; libtool does mangle your line and separate it into:
>
> -Wl,--push-state -Wl,--as-needed
On 09/06/2016 11:57 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Christian Seiler , 2016-09-05, 20:33:
>> Also note that there are plans to make init non-Essential in the future,
>
> The future is now! init is non-essential already. You can remove it
> from your unstable chroot if you want to.
* Christian Seiler , 2016-09-05, 20:33:
Also note that there are plans to make init non-Essential in the
future,
The future is now! init is non-essential already. You can remove it from
your unstable chroot if you want to.
MIPS (at least 32bit) doesn't support 64bit
hi,
On 09/05/2016 09:11 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 08:59 PM, Muri Nicanor wrote:
>> On 09/05/2016 08:33 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
>>>Since you depend on systemd.pc, which is part of the
>>>systemd package, just Build-Depend on systemd to make
>>>systemd.pc
On 09/05/2016 08:59 PM, Muri Nicanor wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 08:33 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
>>Since you depend on systemd.pc, which is part of the
>>systemd package, just Build-Depend on systemd to make
>>systemd.pc available. You won't need porterbox access
>>to fix that issue.
Hi,
On 09/05/2016 08:33 PM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 07:20 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:07:51PM +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote:
>>> so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
>>> recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i
On 09/05/2016 07:20 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:07:51PM +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote:
>> so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
>> recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i don't have
>> testmachines of?
> Porterboxes. See
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 05:39:16PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> (I don't think every architecture has a porterbox machine, so some of them
> might be out of possibility
I think all release one have.
> e.g. mips good, hppa not.
I'm not sure it's worth one's time to test packages on
* Muri Nicanor , 2016-09-05, 19:07:
so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i don't have
testmachines of?
Ask on porters' mailing lists (debian-hppa@, debian-mips@) for someone
to test it for you.
Hi,
>Porterboxes. See https://dsa.debian.org/doc/guest-account/ about getting
>access for non-DDs.
or if you aren't a DM, and have some patches to test, send them to me and I'll
try to
do test builds.
(note: my time is limited, so try to avoid ~100 patches to test, unless
I can script them
On 05/09/16 18:20, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:07:51PM +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote:
so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i don't have
testmachines of?
Porterboxes. See
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:07:51PM +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote:
> so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
> recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i don't have
> testmachines of?
Porterboxes. See https://dsa.debian.org/doc/guest-account/ about getting
access for
hi,
so, i've got my first two FTBFS bugs (on mips and hppa)- what the
recommended way of testing fixes for architectures i don't have
testmachines of?
cheers,
--
muri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
14 matches
Mail list logo