Actually, thinking about it, the CI results will not be representative in this case, as they use golang-go on amd64 only.
If you wanted to do a somewhat quick test of the entire archive on a specific architecture, you could replicate the setup described at https://pkg-go.alioth.debian.org/ci.html (tl;dr: create a gopath using pgt-gopath, run ci-build). I don’t have sufficient access to non-amd64 machines to do it myself. On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Michael Stapelberg <stapelb...@debian.org> wrote: > As mentioned on IRC: > > 08:18 @sECuRE> cbmuser: yeah, replacing golang-go with golang-any should > do the trick > 08:19 @sECuRE> cbmuser: in fact, after the migration of our repos to salsa > (a matter of a small number of weeks at this point), i > think we can trivially update all repos, wait for the CI > results to trickle in, and upload the updated packages > > Do note that making packages available on more architectures exposes more > portability issues, so increases our workload. > > It would be a nice gesture if you (or someone?) could volunteer to field > and fix these portability issues as they arise, at least for the transition > period, to help smooth out the increased workload. > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:24 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < > glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > >> Dear Debian Go Packaging Team! >> >> Some time ago, I had a discussion with Ian Lance Taylor from Go upstream >> regarding the state of gccgo as compared to golang-go. >> >> According to Ian, gccgo should be able to build any package without >> problems >> that builds with golang-go. Any package that does not build fine with >> gccgo >> is considered to be a bug in gccgo and should be reported upstream. >> >> To test the validity of this statement, I picked a number of packages from >> your package list which have "golang-go" in their Build-Depends and >> replaced >> "golang-go" with "golang-any" and tried to test build the packages on a >> powerpc porterbox - an architecture which doesn't have a golang-go port. >> >> The following packages were tested: >> >> * golang-glide >> * gocode >> * codesearch >> * golang-petname >> * gopass >> * golang-golang-x-exp >> * snapd >> >> Out of these 7 packages, 5 packages built fine. Both golang-golang-x-exp >> and snapd didn't built because they had additional build dependencies >> which >> could not be fulfilled. >> >> However, I think this quick test shows that chances are pretty high that >> a large number of golang-go-any packages will build fine with gccgo on >> architectures like powerpc and sparc64. >> >> Thus, I would like to ask to replace "golang-go" in the Build-Depends for >> all Go packages which are maintained by the Debian Go Packaging Team. >> >> Would that be possible? Would be awesome to raise the number of available >> packages on Debian Ports architectures :-). >> >> Thanks, >> Adrian >> >> -- >> .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz >> : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org >> `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de >> `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list >> Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg- >> go-maintainers >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Michael > -- Best regards, Michael
_______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers