> I believe that the date mentioned above was a week ago, and I haven't seen
> any objections. So it's a time to release 4.5.19 finally, isn't it?
Yes, indeed! I got distracted and then ill, and let it slide.
I'll do it today.
Thanks,
Roland
---
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 06:59:04PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I've done scratch builds for Fedora 10 and 12 (x86_64, i386, ppc64, ppc),
> available here:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/roland/task_1742936/
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/roland/task_1742937/
>
> (The build
On Monday 12 October 2009 16:36:43 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:18:26PM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 04:31:38PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > [...] Are we about ready to go now?
> >
> > Yes, everything looks OK, except build failure on Debia
I've done scratch builds for Fedora 10 and 12 (x86_64, i386, ppc64, ppc),
available here:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/roland/task_1742936/
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/roland/task_1742937/
(The build system and/or network is resisting me so there isn't a Fedora 11
one there, bu
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 05:08:35PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 12 October 2009 16:36:43 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:18:26PM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 04:31:38PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > > [...] Are we about ready to
On Monday 12 October 2009 16:36:43 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:18:26PM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 04:31:38PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > [...] Are we about ready to go now?
> >
> > Yes, everything looks OK, except build failure on Debia
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:18:26PM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 04:31:38PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > [...] Are we about ready to go now?
>
> Yes, everything looks OK, except build failure on Debian sparc.
With help of Mike and Frederik, this problem should be fi
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:39:59AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 12 October 2009 10:34:57 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:27:23PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > > Now it builds both the 32 and 64bit strace binaries on sparc64, thanks!
> > Does it also work there
HI,
On Monday 12 October 2009 16:34:57 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> Does it also work there? ;)
Yes it does :) (At least for my couple of tests...)
Best regards
Frederik Schüler
--
ENOSIG
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Monday 12 October 2009 10:34:57 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:27:23PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > Now it builds both the 32 and 64bit strace binaries on sparc64, thanks!
>
> Does it also work there? ;)
it works for me in sparc32 userland
-mike
signature.asc
Descr
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 04:27:23PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
>
> Now it builds both the 32 and 64bit strace binaries on sparc64, thanks!
Does it also work there? ;)
--
ldv
pgpZDJQmsXeQn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
Hi!
Now it builds both the 32 and 64bit strace binaries on sparc64, thanks!
Best regards
Frederik Schüler
On Monday 12 October 2009 16:19:07 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 12 October 2009 10:04:42 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > But we got another issue open:
> >
> > gcc -m64 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
On Monday 12 October 2009 10:04:42 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> But we got another issue open:
>
> gcc -m64 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc64 -I../linux/sparc64
> -Ilinux - I../linux -Wall -g -O2 -MT util.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/util.Tpo
> -c -o util.o ../util.c
> ../util.c: In function ‘print
Hi!
The addressed issue is fixed now, thanks!
But we got another issue open:
gcc -m64 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc64 -I../linux/sparc64 -Ilinux -
I../linux -Wall -g -O2 -MT util.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/util.Tpo -c -o util.o
../util.c
../util.c: In function ‘printcall’:
../util.c:1254:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 04:48:55PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 09 October 2009 07:42:19 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > thanks fot the patch, with a small fix, the 32bit strace binary on sparc
> > builds now [...] but the 64bit binary fails:
> >
> > gcc -m64 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 04:31:38PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> [...] Are we about ready to go now?
Yes, everything looks OK, except build failure on Debian sparc.
--
ldv
pgpeNjawEHJX2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
> The script is clumsy, so enhancements are welcome.
I cleaned it up. Are we about ready to go now?
Thanks,
Roland
--
Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 03:01:56AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 02:48:49PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > I propose to build release tarballs from clean checked out source, and
> > > to set file timestamps right after checkout, e.g.
> > >
> > > git clone /path/to/str
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 02:48:49PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I propose to build release tarballs from clean checked out source, and
> > to set file timestamps right after checkout, e.g.
> >
> > git clone /path/to/strace.git &&
> > cd strace &&
> > git-set-file-times &&
> > autoreconf -i &&
> I propose to build release tarballs from clean checked out source, and
> to set file timestamps right after checkout, e.g.
>
> git clone /path/to/strace.git &&
> cd strace &&
> git-set-file-times &&
> autoreconf -i &&
> ./configure --enable-maintainer-mode &&
> TAR_OPTIONS='--owner=0 --group=0 -
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 10:49:30AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Yes, there are no problem, at least for those who just build strace from
> > tarball. But there are people who still list tarball contents before use.
> > Maybe it's some kind of a taste, but for me it would be a bit more fair if
On Friday 09 October 2009 07:42:19 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> thanks fot the patch, with a small fix, the 32bit strace binary on sparc
> builds now:
>
> diff --git a/util.c b/util.c
> index c96eb0a..ddb7195 100644
> --- a/util.c
> +++ b/util.c
> @@ -83,7 +83,9 @@
> # define fpq kernel_fpq
> # de
> Yes, there are no problem, at least for those who just build strace from
> tarball. But there are people who still list tarball contents before use.
> Maybe it's some kind of a taste, but for me it would be a bit more fair if
> each file timestamp in tarball would correspond to the last file cha
Hi!
thanks fot the patch, with a small fix, the 32bit strace binary on sparc builds
now:
diff --git a/util.c b/util.c
index c96eb0a..ddb7195 100644
--- a/util.c
+++ b/util.c
@@ -83,7 +83,9 @@
# define fpq kernel_fpq
# define fq kernel_fq
# define fpu kernel_fpu
+# ifdef HAS_ASM_REG_H
# inclu
On Thursday 08 October 2009 21:09:22 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 08 October 2009 20:33:31 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > On Friday 09 October 2009 01:14:13 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > On sparc, it is defined as "static struct regs regs;"
> > > Nothing has changed in this area since v4.5.18.
>
On Thursday 08 October 2009 20:33:31 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> On Friday 09 October 2009 01:14:13 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On sparc, it is defined as "static struct regs regs;"
> > Nothing has changed in this area since v4.5.18.
>
> Yes, still barfing:
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/s
Hi!
On Friday 09 October 2009 01:14:13 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On sparc, it is defined as "static struct regs regs;"
> Nothing has changed in this area since v4.5.18.
Yes, still barfing:
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc -I../linux/sparc -Ilinux -I../linux
-Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.
On Thursday 08 October 2009 19:14:13 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 03:00:50PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> [...]
>
> > and on sparc:
> >
> > gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc -I../linux/sparc -Ilinux
> > -I../linux -Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/syscal
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 03:00:50PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
[...]
> and on sparc:
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc -I../linux/sparc -Ilinux
> -I../linux
> -Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/syscall.Tpo -c -o syscall.o
> ../syscall.c
[...]
> ../syscall.c: In funct
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 07:03:14PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger already submitted a fix for this issue, I'm going to check
> > it on x86 and x86-64, and merge it if everything is OK.
>
> Ok.
>
> > Another small issue is file timestamps in release tarball.
> > Since git does not
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 22:03:14 Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Another small issue is file timestamps in release tarball.
> > Since git does not store timestamps, all files will have current mtime
> > after checkout, while we still package files with last modification in
> > previous century (e.g.
> Mike Frysinger already submitted a fix for this issue, I'm going to check
> it on x86 and x86-64, and merge it if everything is OK.
Ok.
> Another small issue is file timestamps in release tarball.
> Since git does not store timestamps, all files will have current mtime
> after checkout, while w
Hi Andreas,
the fix works, thanks.
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 16:44:33 Andreas Schwab wrote:
> I've pushed this change:
>
> From 0fda1c59cc707918b7d5de9c516c629d0abb4f3c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Andreas Schwab
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 16:00:31 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix build on ia64
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 09:00:50 Frederik Schüler wrote:
> and on sparc:
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/sparc -I../linux/sparc -Ilinux
> -I../linux -Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/syscall.Tpo -c -o
> syscall.o ../syscall.c
> In file included from ../syscall.c:129:
> .
Frederik Schüler writes:
> I just did a test build on all available porter boxes, and found the build
> failing on ia64:
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Ilinux/ia64 -I../linux/ia64 -Ilinux -I../linux
>
> -Wall -g -O2 -MT syscall.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/syscall.Tpo -c -o syscall.o
> ../syscall
Hi!
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 03:05:32 Roland McGrath wrote:
> I'd like Frederik and Andreas to reply that they see no problems, and then
> I'll tag it and push out to sourceforge and Fedora. In the next cycle, I
> would be pleased to have Andreas and/or Dmitry do either or both of those
> las
Roland McGrath writes:
> I'd like Frederik and Andreas to reply that they see no problems
I've gone through the fedora bugs and verified that they are fixed.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for som
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 06:05:32PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I committed some nits to make for a happy make distcheck (d087571). After
> that, everything looks good to me.
I noticed a compilation warning on x86:
util.c: In function 'do_ptrace':
util.c:260: warning: passing argument 4 of 'ptr
I committed some nits to make for a happy make distcheck (d087571). After
that, everything looks good to me. I did some unofficial/unsaved builds in
the Fedora buildsystem at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/roland
(they only stay there for a day or two), which came out fine--happy builds
an
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 04:27:41PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
[...]
> I have verified that upstream strace HEAD works correctly on hppa.
Good news. Looks like everything is ready for 4.5.19 release?
--
ldv
pgpaN6COQs6ry.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
That all looks good to me. Go ahead and merge it. If Frederik has any
more tweaks to add, just commit those on top.
Thanks,
Roland
--
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only deve
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 01:30:07AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 11:10:09PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> >
> > I did the checks myself now, thanks to debian porters machines.
> > armel build fixes confirmed.
> > hppa issues fixed and tested, patch attached.
> > I hope
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 11:10:09PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
>
> I did the checks myself now, thanks to debian porters machines.
> armel build fixes confirmed.
> hppa issues fixed and tested, patch attached.
> I hope the format is ok, this is my first official git commit ;)
Thank you.
T
Hi!
I did the checks myself now, thanks to debian porters machines.
armel build fixes confirmed.
hppa issues fixed and tested, patch attached.
I hope the format is ok, this is my first official git commit ;)
Best regards
Frederik Schüler
On Monday 05 October 2009 17:45:28 Dmitry V. Levin wro
On Monday 05 October 2009 11:45:28 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 04:10:48AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:04:45AM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > > I attached my current diff, you might want to crosscheck, waiting for
> > > debian h
It's been long enough already. Whatever the particulars, we can't keep
waiting. I want to see the release this week.
Thanks,
Roland
--
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only deve
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 04:10:48AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:04:45AM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> [...]
> > I attached my current diff, you might want to crosscheck, waiting for
> > debian
> > hppa porters to confirm the issues are fixed.
>
> Is there an
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:04:45AM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
[...]
> I attached my current diff, you might want to crosscheck, waiting for debian
> hppa porters to confirm the issues are fixed.
Is there any feedback from hppa porters?
--
ldv
pgpE6zn2KTdMD.pgp
Description: PGP signa
On Monday 21 September 2009 16:40:34 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 08:56:43PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
> > I was tracking my stuff against the CVS, I am cloning the git repo right
> > now and will migrate the debian things over.
> >
> > There are a couple of things we must
Hi!
On Monday 21 September 2009 22:40:34 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520084
>
> I believe it was fixed already, so I added "closes: #520084" to the
> debian/changelog file last Monday.
Yes confirmed, the patch is already in git.
I attached my curr
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 08:56:43PM +0200, Frederik Schüler wrote:
>
> I was tracking my stuff against the CVS, I am cloning the git repo right now
> and will migrate the debian things over.
>
> There are a couple of things we must address for Debian, mainly the build
> failures on hppa and
Hi!
I was tracking my stuff against the CVS, I am cloning the git repo right now
and will migrate the debian things over.
There are a couple of things we must address for Debian, mainly the build
failures on hppa and armel:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=546619
http://bugs.de
> AFAICS all fedora bugs are covered, the only major issue left is the
> SIGTRAP handling.
Great! I think we should leave that slightly hairy issue for after this
release, so I think we are about ready to go. It would sure be nice to
hear from Frederik...
Thanks,
Roland
--
Roland McGrath writes:
> Andreas, please look it over. It also wouldn't hurt to do a round-up of
> the open Fedora bugs, make sure the ones fixed in this release are
> mentioned in the log so we close them with the Fedora update, and list here
> pending ones not yet fixed so we can start tying t
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:49:07AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Done, please review:
> > http://strace.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=strace/strace;a=commitdiff;h=ldv/release
> > I probably missed some noteworthy changes, feel free to add/correct.
>
> Looks good to me! Thanks! Go ahead
> Done, please review:
> http://strace.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=strace/strace;a=commitdiff;h=ldv/release
> I probably missed some noteworthy changes, feel free to add/correct.
Looks good to me! Thanks! Go ahead and merge it and we can add any
follow-on changes as needed.
Andreas,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:16:50AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 06:25:13PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > Two months ago I said that I'd like to see reintroduced one change (which
> > > was lost with big revert commit) made by Denys: "Replace many more bare
> > > ptra
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 06:25:13PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Two months ago I said that I'd like to see reintroduced one change (which
> > was lost with big revert commit) made by Denys: "Replace many more bare
> > ptrace calls with calls to wrappers which do proper error-checking and
> > se
58 matches
Mail list logo
