Well it is a good start. =D There are still complaints, though haven't seen the bug reports, that modern kernel's are unstable on certain peices of hardware. Personally I can't reproduce any of these issues, I have rolled out the latest kernel for a while now on some of my sparc systems, my T2000 has an uptime of about 80days and it's running wheezy but using a vanilla 3.13.9 build. There is also some problems with the kernel hanging in the early stages of the boot process, though once again I have not seen this. What the sparc port needs are a couple of people to become familiar with the Debian build process and to find major bugs report and fix them.
I haven't checked but I think that SILO is currently a version or two ahead of what debian is using for it's installs. That might be the issue. Wish I had more time to invest in this. -Kieron On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Patrick Baggett <[email protected]>wrote: > BTW, the sparc buildd looks like gcc 4-8.2-21 is successful and so is > gcc-4.9.0-1. I've installed them from sid. Crisis averted? > > Patrick > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Sébastien Bernard <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Le 30/04/2014 20:36, Patrick Baggett a écrit : >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Ivo De Decker <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 03:42:39PM +0200, Sébastien Bernard wrote: >>> > Indeed, the last good build seems to be gcc-4.8-4.8.2-19. >>> > Look at the changelog for the -20 they seems to have done something on >>> the sparc >>> > that blocks the generation of the libraries. >>> >>> A number of binaries are now built by gcc-4.9 instead of gcc-4.8. As >>> there is >>> no build of gcc-4.9 on sparc, these binaries are missing. >>> >>> https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=gcc-4.9&arch=sparc >>> >>> So if you want to fix the sparc issue, you probably need to get gcc-4.9 >>> to >>> build there. When doing that, you need to start from a gcc-4.8 version >>> from >>> before the change, as newer version are not functional without the >>> packages >>> from gcc-4.9. >>> >>> ??? >> I thought jessie was using gcc-4.8 and not gcc-4.9 >> >> OK, so we additionally need to look into why gcc-4.9 is not installable? >> >> Patrick >> >> >> No, we don't. Period. >> >> I built the gcc-4.8-4.8-19, and all the binaries are there. >> I'm going to involve the gcc maintainer cause what they did broke >> completely the build be it jessie or sid. >> >> We have libgcc1, lib64gcc1, libstdc++6, and libstdc++6 available from >> the repositories in version 4.8.2-19. >> But, the new builds -20 and -21 have overriden all the other packages >> from -19 since they have been build ok. >> So, now, we have nothing to install because gcc-base-4.8_4.8.2-20 depends >> on libgcc1-4.8.2_4.8.2-20 which isn't build (this is the message from >> apt-get). >> >> And this is not solvable, we're halfway through, with partial -19 >> packages and missing packages -20. >> >> And if you think it has zero impact, think twice. The debootstrap is not >> able to build a sid install because of this. >> So, meanwhile, I'll setup a mini directory with the packages availables >> (I need to remember how to setup a debian repository again). >> >> All in all, this broken package has blocked the complete buildd, since >> there is no more libgcc1 and no more libstdc++ installable. >> >> Did I say there is no gcc-4.9 ? >> >> Here is the recipe for disaster for sparc. >> >> Seb >> > >
