Hi alnsn,
The bpfjit_mbuf_ldb_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldh_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldw_ind test
cases of the net/bpfjit/t_mbuf test are failing on amd64 since the
following commits:
2014.07.22.08.20.08 alnsn src/sys/net/bpfjit.c 1.29
2014.07.22.08.29.51 alnsn src/sys/net/bpfjit.c 1.30
Log output from one
This is an automatically generated notice of a NetBSD-current/i386
build failure.
The failure occurred on babylon5.NetBSD.org, a NetBSD/amd64 host,
using sources from CVS date 2014.07.24.14.22.55.
An extract from the build.sh output follows:
(Please keep me on the cc: when replying, otherwise we get 24-hour lags
such as this waiting for me to check list mail again)
On 7/23/14, 12:10 PM, Alan Barrett wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Jeff Rizzo wrote:
Attached is the proposed diff to build.sh with the changes, including
hpcarm -
Hi Andreas,
Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
Hi alnsn,
The bpfjit_mbuf_ldb_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldh_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldw_ind test
cases of the net/bpfjit/t_mbuf test are failing on amd64 since the
following commits:
2014.07.22.08.20.08 alnsn src/sys/net/bpfjit.c 1.29
2014.07.22.08.29.51 alnsn
On Sun, 20 Jul 2014, Iain Hibbert wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014, William D. Jones wrote:
it certainly is. I think I remember that __USE() now, it was a local
(NetBSD) addition due to a set but unused variable, which is changed in
upstream versions now.
Alright then. What do you suggest
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:43:57PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
Surprise (-current/amd64):
# cpuctl identify 0
cpu0: highest basic info 000d
cpu0: highest extended info 8008
cpu0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2520M CPU @ 2.50GHz
cpu0: Intel Xeon E3-12xx, 2nd gen i7, i5, i3 2xxx
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:21:29PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:43:57PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
Surprise (-current/amd64):
# cpuctl identify 0
cpu0: highest basic info 000d
cpu0: highest extended info 8008
cpu0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2520M CPU @
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:36:43PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:21:29PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:43:57PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
Surprise (-current/amd64):
# cpuctl identify 0
cpu0: highest basic info 000d
cpu0:
Alexander Nasonov wrote:
Hi Andreas,
Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
Hi alnsn,
The bpfjit_mbuf_ldb_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldh_ind, bpfjit_mbuf_ldw_ind test
cases of the net/bpfjit/t_mbuf test are failing on amd64 since the
following commits:
2014.07.22.08.20.08 alnsn src/sys/net/bpfjit.c
Good going :D!
As of 5 minutes ago, by setting HAVE_GCC=4, HAVE_PCC=1, MKGCC=no, and
MKPCC=yes, I've successfully compiled the current pcc in the NetBSD source
tree (using i486--netbsdelf-gcc) into my (global for all archs) NetBSD tools
directory. pcc has also just successfully built a kernel
First error of the night:
# compile libiberty/regex.o
/mnt/lfs/NetBSD-CVS/src/../tools/bin/i486--netbsdelf-pcc -O2-std=gnu99
-Werror -Os -Wno-error=uninitialized -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized --sysroot=/mnt/lfs/NetBSD-CVS/src/../destdir/i386-pb
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H
Accidentally forgot to Cc: the mailing list... whoops!
-Original Message-
From: William D. Jones
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 10:55 PM
To: Jeff Rizzo
Subject: Re: ARM ABI changes/combinations (was Re: Preparation for creating
netbsd-7 branch)
That said, if people don't care about
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, William D. Jones wrote:
First error of the night:
# compile libiberty/regex.o
/mnt/lfs/NetBSD-CVS/src/../tools/bin/i486--netbsdelf-pcc -O2-std=gnu99
-Werror -Os -Wno-error=uninitialized -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized
13 matches
Mail list logo
