Re: O: silo -- Sparc Improved LOader
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Axel Beckert a...@debian.org wrote: Control: retitle -1 ITA: silo -- Sparc Improved LOader Control: owner -1 ! Hi Jurij, Jurij Smakov wrote: There are currently no serious bugs that I know of, so it's mostly about keeping it reasonably up to date. Ok, I'll try my luck. I managed to revamp the package in a way that my UltraSparc still boots. ;-) I though couldn't yet play around with silo on sparc64, see my other recent mail to debian-sparc@lists.debian.org. Prospective maintainers should have access to sparc hardware to be able to do at least minimal testing, Given. joining the 'debootloaders' project on Alioth (within which silo was previously maintained) is a good idea as well. Request sent. I'm also already subscribed to the debootloaders-silo mailing list. I though don't intent to continue maintaining the package in svn, but rather switch to git, with the git repository based on the previous svn repository. I'll create the git repository on Alioth and push my changes as soon as I've got write permissions to /git/debootloaders/. I approved your membership request, so you should be good to go now. Thanks for picking it up. Further co-maintainers of course still welcome! :-) Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- Jurij Smakov | ju...@wooyd.org | Key IDs: 43C30A7D/C99E03CC
Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
Hi, The final results are in: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 ||8 ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 ||3 kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 mips || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5? s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0* sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [1] The (1) and .5 is from a I am not primarily a porter [...]-remark, so I wasn't sure how to count it. [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. NMs/DMs include DMs and people currently in NM process. The Other column may include people who said they would like to become porters (but would need to be introduced to the job) and thus may imply some active recruiting from the current porters. This is at least true for hurd-i386. The current policy says that we require 5 developers (i.e. DDs) for release architectures[AP], so based on that only amd64, i386 and hurd-i386 would pass this requirement. It is quite possible we need to revise that requirement, but most of the architectures would (still) do well to attract a few more (DD) porters. I have attached a file with my notes of who are behind those numbers. If your name is missing or you believe I have miscounted something[CD] for an architecture listed in the table above, please reply to this email *promptly* (CC'ing me explicitly is fine) with your concerns or corrections. At this time, I have *not* updated the arch qualification table yet. I will do that in a couple of days. We will also follow up on this in the next bits from the release team. ~Niels [AP] http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_policy.html [CD] I may (or may not) have been caffeine-deprived when I did the counting. You are free to make assumptions about whether that has affected my ability to do addic^Htion or parsing your email(s) properly. Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 ||8 ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 ||3 kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 mips || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5? s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0* sparc || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [1] Roger Leigh: I am not primarily a porter [...]. armel: Wookey (DD), Gatis Visnevskis (!DD), Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (DD), Steve McInture (DD) armhf: Jeremiah Foster (!DD, but NM?), Wookey (DD), Justus Winter (!DD), Lennart Sorensen (!DD), Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (DD), Steve McInture (DD) hurd-i386: Samuel Thibault (DD), Barry deFreese (DD), Thomas Schwinge (!DD), Pino Toscano (DD), Svante Signell (!DD), Michael Banck (DD), Guillem Jover (DD), Zhang Cong (!DD) kfreebsd-amd64: Christoph Egger (DD), Axel Beckert (DD), Petr Salinger (!DD), Robert Millan (DD), Steven Chamberlain (!DD), Guillem Jover (DD) kfreebsd-i386: Christoph Egger (DD), Axel Beckert (DD), Petr Salinger (!DD), Robert Millan (DD), Steven Chamberlain (!DD), Guillem Jover (DD) mips: Graham Whaley (!DD), Andreas Barth (DD) mipsel: Graham Whaley (!DD), Andreas Barth (DD) powerpc: [Roger Leigh (DD)], Geoff Levand (!DD), Lennart Sorensen (!DD) sparc: Axel Beckert (DD) Maybes for ia64 (?): Martin Lucina (!DD), Émeric MASCHINO (!DD), Mark Wickens (!DD) (Some inaccuracies can occur in the (xN) below; /me got confused and may have lost count for some of them) Items suggested in the roll call: * test packages: armel (x3), armhf (x4), hurd-i386 (x4), kfreebsd-amd64 (x6), kfreebsd-i386 (x6), mips, mipsel, powerpc (x3), sparc * fix toolchain issues: armel, armhf (x3), hurd-i386 (x3), mips, mipsel, powerpc (x2) * triage arch-specific bugs: armel (x3), armhf (x4), hurd-i386 (x4), kfreebsd-amd64 (x5), kfreebsd-i386 (x5), mips (x2), mipsel (x2), powerpc (x2), sparc * fix arch-related bugs: armel (x2), armhf (x4), hurd-i386 (x5), kfreebsd-amd64 (x5), kfreebsd-i386 (x5), mips (x2), mipsel (x2), powerpc (x2) * maintain buildds: armhf, hurd-i386 (x2), kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel Items suggested by porters in their mails: + test d-i when needed: hurd-i386, powerpc (x3) + maintain arch-related pkgs: kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386 + maintain non-DSA porter box: hurd-i386 (x2), kfreebsd-amd64 + maintain production system of $arch: sparc/Wheezy
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
On 10/02/2013 09:45, Niels Thykier wrote: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- [...] sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. In addition gcc no longer supports 32bit sparc according to the architecture qualification notes for Squeeze[1] and Wheezy[2]. [1] http://release.debian.org/squeeze/arch_qualify.html#sparc-upstream [2] http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html#sparc-upstream So it might make sense to drop sparc in any case and add sparc64 if there are enough people interested. Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524be06e.2000...@debian.org
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
Hi, [I've replaced debian-ports with debian-sparc in the recipients list] Niels Thykier wrote: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- […] sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 […] [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. Ansgar Burchardt wrote: So it might make sense to drop sparc in any case and add sparc64 if there are enough people interested. Well, count me in for sparc64 in general, too. I expect, too, that's where we're heading to anyway, and I don't expect too many differences. I though fear that we're not yet there: Yesterday I tried to setup a sparc64 chroot on a second disc in one of my Sparcs, but the currently documented way[1] to do so failed[2] due to outdated packages. On a first glance it looks like missing BinNMUs for the Perl 5.14 to Perl 5.18 transition. [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Sparc64#Bootstrapping_sparc64 [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2013/10/msg1.html OTOH such issues were present in the past[3] of sparc64, too, back then with the transition from Perl 5.10 to Perl 5.12. [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2011/05/msg00030.html Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bootstrapping Sparc64: Outdated, but required perl module packages? (Perl 5.14 vs 5.18)
Hi, I was trying to get Sparc64 running as documented on https://wiki.debian.org/Sparc64#Bootstrapping_sparc64 but multistrap failed due to some required Perl module packages not yet being rebuilt against Perl 5.18: I: Calculating required packages. apt-get -y -o Apt::Architecture=sparc64 -o Dir::Etc::TrustedParts=/mnt/sparc64/etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d -o Dir::Etc::Trusted=/mnt/sparc64/etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/trusted.gpg -o Apt::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=true -o Apt::Get::Download-Only=true -o Apt::Install-Recommends=false -o Dir=/mnt/sparc64/ -o Dir::Etc=/mnt/sparc64/etc/apt/ -o Dir::Etc::Parts=/mnt/sparc64/etc/apt/apt.conf.d/ -o Dir::Etc::PreferencesParts=/mnt/sparc64/etc/apt/preferences.d/ -o APT::Default-Release=* -o Dir::State=/mnt/sparc64/var/lib/apt/ -o Dir::State::Status=/mnt/sparc64/var/lib/dpkg/status -o Dir::Cache=/mnt/sparc64/var/cache/apt/ install apt base-files base-passwd bash bsdutils coreutils dash debconf debconf-i18n debian-ports-archive-keyring debianutils diffutils dpkg dpkg-dev e2fslibs e2fsprogs findutils gcc-4.7-base gcc-4.8-base grep gzip hostname initscripts libacl1 libattr1 libblkid1 libc-bin libc6 libcomerr2 libgcc1 liblocale-gettext-perl liblzma5 libmount1 libncurses5 libpam-modules libpam-modules-bin libpam-runtime libpam0g libpcre3 libselinux1 libsepol1 libss2 libtext-charwidth-perl libtext-iconv-perl libtext-wrapi18n-perl libtinfo5 libuuid1 login lsb-base mawk mount multiarch-support ncurses-base ncurses-bin passwd perl-base sed sensible-utils sysv-rc sysvinit sysvinit-utils tar tzdata util-linux zlib1g Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: liblocale-gettext-perl : PreDepends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-charwidth-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-iconv-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. apt download failed. Exit value: 100 Strange, these dependencies got to call 5.18.1-2 as well. Sparc64 does both. Because 5.18.1-2 is what's in the repo. You can check the sheets. http://packages.debian.org/sid/liblocale-gettext-perl http://packages.debian.org/sid/libtext-charwidth-perl http://packages.debian.org/sid/libtext-iconv-perl http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-sparc64/main/p/perl/ About using stable; Debian-ports repo does unstable, experimental, sid and unreleased. True it's main only. http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/dists/ Thanks, Frans van Berckel Simple, if Media Engineering does! Website: http://www.fransvanberckel.nl/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9d60109dcd3d00a0c9fcd1e3e0fe6258.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
Add me for armel. Bastien Le 2 oct. 2013 09:46, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net a écrit : Hi, The final results are in: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 ||8 ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 ||3 kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 mips || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5? s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0* sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [1] The (1) and .5 is from a I am not primarily a porter [...]-remark, so I wasn't sure how to count it. [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. NMs/DMs include DMs and people currently in NM process. The Other column may include people who said they would like to become porters (but would need to be introduced to the job) and thus may imply some active recruiting from the current porters. This is at least true for hurd-i386. The current policy says that we require 5 developers (i.e. DDs) for release architectures[AP], so based on that only amd64, i386 and hurd-i386 would pass this requirement. It is quite possible we need to revise that requirement, but most of the architectures would (still) do well to attract a few more (DD) porters. I have attached a file with my notes of who are behind those numbers. If your name is missing or you believe I have miscounted something[CD] for an architecture listed in the table above, please reply to this email *promptly* (CC'ing me explicitly is fine) with your concerns or corrections. At this time, I have *not* updated the arch qualification table yet. I will do that in a couple of days. We will also follow up on this in the next bits from the release team. ~Niels [AP] http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_policy.html [CD] I may (or may not) have been caffeine-deprived when I did the counting. You are free to make assumptions about whether that has affected my ability to do addic^Htion or parsing your email(s) properly.
Re: Bootstrapping Sparc64: Outdated, but required perl module packages? (Perl 5.14 vs 5.18)
Hi Frans, thanks for looking into this issue. Frans van Berckel wrote: The following packages have unmet dependencies: liblocale-gettext-perl : PreDepends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-charwidth-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-iconv-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. apt download failed. Exit value: 100 Strange, these dependencies got to call 5.18.1-2 as well. Sparc64 does both. Because 5.18.1-2 is what's in the repo. You can check the sheets. Sure, Perl is 5.18 in the repo, but not all necessary packages have been rebuilt for 5.18: http://packages.debian.org/sid/liblocale-gettext-perl From that page: dep: perl-base (= 5.14.2-3) [sparc64] dep: perl-base (= 5.18.1-2) [nicht sparc64, …] dep: perlapi-5.14.2 [sparc64, …] virtuelles Paket, bereitgestellt durch perl-base dep: perlapi-5.18.1 [nicht sparc64, …] virtuelles Paket, bereitgestellt durch perl-base So it clearly states that liblocale-gettext-perl on sparc64 is out of date with regards to the Perl. http://packages.debian.org/sid/libtext-charwidth-perl http://packages.debian.org/sid/libtext-iconv-perl Same issue here. So who can schedule BinNMUs for sparc64? Because that's what would help. Or can I cross-compile stuff for sparc64 on sparc? About using stable; Debian-ports repo does unstable, experimental, sid and unreleased. True it's main only. That's ok. I just thought it may help to install Stable and then dist-upgrade to unstable to workaround this issue. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002124801.gd3...@sym.noone.org
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
+++ Niels Thykier [2013-10-02 09:45 +0200]: Hi, The final results are in: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 armel: Wookey (DD), Gatis Visnevskis (!DD), Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (DD), Steve McIntyre (DD) armhf: Jeremiah Foster (!DD, but NM?), Wookey (DD), Justus Winter (!DD), Lennart Sorensen (!DD), Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (DD), Steve McIntyre (DD) I am surprised not to see Riku Voipio and Hector Oron on this list as I know they help manage the buildds and Riku signs uploads. I don't know if they are trying to escape, or just being too slack to send mail :-) arm64: Wookey (DD), Steve McInture (DD) There are other DDs working on this too (Doko and Riku particularly), but again they are probably trying to avoid getting any more formal responsibilities. :-) Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002150724.ge32...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
Hello, all. I am not currently a porter but I would like to be one for the s390x architecture. I am familiar with zSeries system programming and have a lot of experience in running Linux in virtual environments, mostly z/VM on large IBM processors.. I use Linux for 11 year, family with cross compiling tool chain. I am not a DD/DM. and I am somewhat surprised not to see Philiip Kern (pk...@debian.org) on the list. DJ On 10/02/2013 02:45 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: Hi, The final results are in: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 ||8 ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 ||3 kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 mips || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5? s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0* sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [1] The (1) and .5 is from a I am not primarily a porter [...]-remark, so I wasn't sure how to count it. [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. NMs/DMs include DMs and people currently in NM process. The Other column may include people who said they would like to become porters (but would need to be introduced to the job) and thus may imply some active recruiting from the current porters. This is at least true for hurd-i386. The current policy says that we require 5 developers (i.e. DDs) for release architectures[AP], so based on that only amd64, i386 and hurd-i386 would pass this requirement. It is quite possible we need to revise that requirement, but most of the architectures would (still) do well to attract a few more (DD) porters. I have attached a file with my notes of who are behind those numbers. If your name is missing or you believe I have miscounted something[CD] for an architecture listed in the table above, please reply to this email *promptly* (CC'ing me explicitly is fine) with your concerns or corrections. At this time, I have *not* updated the arch qualification table yet. I will do that in a couple of days. We will also follow up on this in the next bits from the release team. ~Niels [AP] http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_policy.html [CD] I may (or may not) have been caffeine-deprived when I did the counting. You are free to make assumptions about whether that has affected my ability to do addic^Htion or parsing your email(s) properly. -- Dave Jones V/Soft Software www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524c3ab0.2020...@vsoft-software.com
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
I'm interesting in helping on ia64. I'm not fluent in ia64 assembly, but I can get around pretty well. I'm very experienced in C/C++/Java and debugging. I've got a fully functional system running Xorg/Mesa3D/sound, so I can reproduce, test, and fix issues as time permits. Patrick Baggett On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net wrote: Hi, The final results are in: Summary table: Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total ---++-++-++---++-- armel || 3 || 0 || 1 ||4 armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 ||6 hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 ||8 ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 ||3 kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 ||6 mips || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 ||2 powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5? s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0* sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 ||1 [1] The (1) and .5 is from a I am not primarily a porter [...]-remark, so I wasn't sure how to count it. [2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be looking at 3 in the Other-column rather than 0. NMs/DMs include DMs and people currently in NM process. The Other column may include people who said they would like to become porters (but would need to be introduced to the job) and thus may imply some active recruiting from the current porters. This is at least true for hurd-i386. The current policy says that we require 5 developers (i.e. DDs) for release architectures[AP], so based on that only amd64, i386 and hurd-i386 would pass this requirement. It is quite possible we need to revise that requirement, but most of the architectures would (still) do well to attract a few more (DD) porters. I have attached a file with my notes of who are behind those numbers. If your name is missing or you believe I have miscounted something[CD] for an architecture listed in the table above, please reply to this email *promptly* (CC'ing me explicitly is fine) with your concerns or corrections. At this time, I have *not* updated the arch qualification table yet. I will do that in a couple of days. We will also follow up on this in the next bits from the release team. ~Niels [AP] http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_policy.html [CD] I may (or may not) have been caffeine-deprived when I did the counting. You are free to make assumptions about whether that has affected my ability to do addic^Htion or parsing your email(s) properly.
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:44:44 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: Yesterday I tried to setup a sparc64 chroot on a second disc in one of my Sparcs, but the currently documented way[1] to do so failed[2] due to outdated packages. On a first glance it looks like missing BinNMUs for the Perl 5.14 to Perl 5.18 transition. Part of the porter's job is to take care of that kind of things. If that's not happening for sparc64 because nobody's actually taking care of the port, I don't see it as a viable candidate for the archive... Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Seems I have bad timing with Debian on SPARC.
Just signed up for this mailing list; had spent a good amount of time over the last week getting my Ultra 60 up and running again. It's mostly OK...heh...execpt the part about having to reprogram the darn NVRAM every time I turn it on. I got jessie installed (Didn't get far in the stable release; first thing I did was try to open iceweasel and it hit a bus error -- unaligned mem access maybe). Working on getting the framebuffer going and whatnot now, went to the Debian forums and figured I'd try this mailing list after no responses there. After checking the posts for the last few months (only a handful!), they seem all about Helloanybody out there using/maintaining this? or Hey if anyone's using driver X y'all need to maintain it yourself 'cause you're the only one using it, heh. So, realistically*, what's the deal? Any point in trying to get this to work or should I cut my losses now and move to some other distribution or OS? I had thought that maybe there was some interest in the architecture since OpenSPARC was published/available for some time. Anyhow. Advice appreciated in advance. thanks *Yes, I'm not being terribly realistic running anything on this box to begin with. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAN-w9fwQ7=FhaE3R=o7Ehx7ckMm=cfxuyiixinjcchmttbc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Bug#721498: O: silo -- Sparc Improved LOader
Hi Jurij, Jurij Smakov wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Axel Beckert a...@debian.org wrote: I'll create the git repository on Alioth and push my changes as soon as I've got write permissions to /git/debootloaders/. I approved your membership request, so you should be good to go now. Done: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debootloaders/silo.git;a=shortlog Upload preferably after I managed to build silo on sparc64, too. If that seems too far away, I'll probably upload earlier. Thanks for picking it up. Thanks for all your work on silo so far! Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002225843.gh3...@sym.noone.org
Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
Him Julien Cristau wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:44:44 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: Yesterday I tried to setup a sparc64 chroot on a second disc in one of my Sparcs, but the currently documented way[1] to do so failed[2] due to outdated packages. On a first glance it looks like missing BinNMUs for the Perl 5.14 to Perl 5.18 transition. Part of the porter's job is to take care of that kind of things. Definitely. If that's not happening for sparc64 because nobody's actually taking care of the port, I don't see it as a viable candidate for the archive... *nod* One of the reasons why I'm trying to improve that... Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002230600.gi3...@sym.noone.org
Re: Bootstrapping Sparc64: Outdated, but required perl module packages? (Perl 5.14 vs 5.18)
Hi again, Axel Beckert wrote: Frans van Berckel wrote: The following packages have unmet dependencies: liblocale-gettext-perl : PreDepends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-charwidth-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable libtext-iconv-perl : Depends: perlapi-5.14.2 but it is not installable E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. apt download failed. Exit value: 100 Got it working. Took the full apt-get command as multistrap did, but removed the three perl modules in question as well as debconf-i18n which needs them, but I never need and which I consider to be primarily disk space waste. But this just got stuff downloaded. Next step was to put that reduced package list into the multistrap.conf's packages= and set omitrequired=true (needs to be in the [General] section) and restart. That worked. Yay! Will likely try to build these three packages locally and see how far I come. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert a...@debian.org, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `-| 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002234858.gj3...@sym.noone.org
Re: Bootstrapping Sparc64: Outdated, but required perl module packages? (Perl 5.14 vs 5.18)
Hi Axel, Got it working. Took the full apt-get command as multistrap did, but removed the three perl modules in question as well as debconf-i18n which needs them, but I never need and which I consider to be primarily disk space waste. But this just got stuff downloaded. Next step was to put that reduced package list into the multistrap.conf's packages= and set omitrequired=true (needs to be in the [General] section) and restart. That worked. Yay! Will likely try to build these three packages locally and see how far I come. You did it! If you have a extra partition left, it's smart to copy a backup on that before install the dev tools. So you can always go back-forward. It's good to know from sparc you can easily chroot into a mounted sparc64 partition. Beware, please mount /proc /sys before if needed. Thanks, Frans van Berckel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e952dd49deaab142e163b7adc67750a4.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl
