Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
2014-11-25 22:39 GMT+00:00 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com: 2014-11-25 20:13 GMT+00:00 Dominique Dumont dominique.dum...@hp.com: [...] So, in summary, I don't think that this is serious (RC), and I even have doubts that it's important in a broad sense. I am quite sure that if you believe that it's important and explain it (we have a bug report of somebody affected, it's not purely theoretical!), they will let it to be applied -- but not 100%, I think that Release Managers are more reluctant to accept fixes than in previous releases. Good that it got accepted. Thanks for taking care of this :-) -- Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
Hmm, according to [1], arm64 and ppc64el have made enough progress to be release architectures for Jessie. Britney no longer has special handling for these two. Therefore, FTBFS regressions for arm64 and ppc64el are now release critical (but non-regressions are not). Since the fix is quite easy, I think we should not bother the release team and upload the fixed package to unstable. (and we need to have the unblock approved by Dec 5th). Thoughts ? [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg5.html -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
2014-11-25 20:13 GMT+00:00 Dominique Dumont dominique.dum...@hp.com: Hmm, according to [1], arm64 and ppc64el have made enough progress to be release architectures for Jessie. Britney no longer has special handling for these two. Therefore, FTBFS regressions for arm64 and ppc64el are now release critical (but non-regressions are not). Since the fix is quite easy, I think we should not bother the release team and upload the fixed package to unstable. (and we need to have the unblock approved by Dec 5th). Thoughts ? [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg5.html First and foremost, I am fine with whatever you want to do, I don't have a strong opinion. I gave my opinion in order to avoid (or at least be aware) the situation where we have a package in unstable during the freeze that release managers don't want to accept in testing. With ppc64el being fringe I meant that, independently of what the release team think, since this is not a mainstream architecture and quite recent, and the bug triggered only under certain conditions, I don't think that there will be lots of people affected by this bug. As a person who helped to get many key packages compiling on both these new architectures (and helped them in other various ways), and made changes to several SDL packages very early on (2013) to get these architectures supported, I am happy to get these things fixed and I do really care about these new ports. I am just pointing out that it's not libsdl2 itself which FTBFS while it compiled before (regression), in which case it would be RC for sure. It's only that some packages that use libsdl2, in C++ (not C or other languages), and (if I understood correctly) only when using the non-default and still experimental -std=c++0x, fail to compile. So, in summary, I don't think that this is serious (RC), and I even have doubts that it's important in a broad sense. I am quite sure that if you believe that it's important and explain it (we have a bug report of somebody affected, it's not purely theoretical!), they will let it to be applied -- but not 100%, I think that Release Managers are more reluctant to accept fixes than in previous releases. Cheers. -- Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
libsdl2 rules file alerady has DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU) ifeq ($(DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU),powerpc) confflags += --disable-altivec endif I'm going to tweak this file to use --disable-altivec on ppc64el arch. This should fix your problem. All the best -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
2014-11-24 7:28 GMT+00:00 Dominique Dumont d...@debian.org: libsdl2 rules file alerady has DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU) ifeq ($(DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU),powerpc) confflags += --disable-altivec endif I'm going to tweak this file to use --disable-altivec on ppc64el arch. This should fix your problem. Just wondering... I am all for fixing this and the change seems easy enough, but would it be worth asking for pre-approval to the release team? If GCC-4.9 still does not officially claim to be fully C++11 compliant (which I don't think it does, but perhaps some later 4.9.x does -- in any case it's not switched on by default), and ppc64el being a new and somewhat fringe arch, and the bug does not affect to the availability of the package itself, I am not 100% sure if they will consider this RC. Cheers. -- Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#770670: g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL
Processing control commands: reassign -1 libsdl2-dev Bug #770670 [g++] g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL Bug reassigned from package 'g++' to 'libsdl2-dev'. No longer marked as found in versions 4.9.2-2. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #770670 to the same values previously set severity -1 serious Bug #770670 [libsdl2-dev] g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal' retitle -1 libsdl2-dev - SDL.h includes altivec.h, breaks c++ code Bug #770670 [libsdl2-dev] g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL Changed Bug title to 'libsdl2-dev - SDL.h includes altivec.h, breaks c++ code' from 'g++: fails to compile in c++0x mode on ppc64el with std::vector and SDL' -- 770670: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770670 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
