Camm Maguire wrote: > Greetings, and thank you so much for looking into this! > > I see how the host matching failed, but both config files use native > object relocation to my understanding.
It was just a theory to explain a succeeding mipsel build despite the broken source in -40. Probably mipsel had already picked up -41 in the meanwhile. > Also, the last patch I believe > should already be applied into the -41 package which failed. Can I > take from your remarks that you've seen a successful build on a mips > (as opposed to mipsel) machine? If so, then the hypothesis might go > back to a physical, hopefully transient, problem on the mips buildd? It was a successful build of -40 on a mips machine. > I have a small fix to make for ia64 too. If there is no known source > problem for mips then I'll upload right after addressing this. Your > advice most appreciated! I still recommend to use the standard match patterns in the configure.in file (and to do the mipsel check before the mips one). Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
