sorry, can't help with this. setting up a pbuilder or sbuild, and start building packages from the base system?
Matthias Am 13.05.2014 03:26, schrieb David Gosselin: > I'm in the same boat as Patrick, except with a PowerMac G5. Please let us > know how to begin. > Thanks, > Dave > >> On May 12, 2014, at 16:02, Patrick Baggett <baggett.patr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Matthias et al, >> >> I'd like to try to do some of this using my sparc box and see how far I get. >> Is there a link that explains how to set up these steps? Others seem to >> "just know" what to do, but I haven't the slightest idea of where to begin. >> I have a box with gcc-4.9, plenty of disk space, and electricity to burn. >> Where do I start? >> >> Patrick >> >> >>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> wrote: >>> With gcc-4.9 now available in testing, it is time to prepare for the change >>> of >>> the default to 4.9, for a subset of architectures or for all (release) >>> architectures. The defaults for the gdc, gccgo, gcj and gnat frontends >>> already >>> point to 4.9 and are used on all architectures. Issue #746805 tracks the >>> gfortran default change, including the change of the Fortran 90 module >>> version >>> change. >>> >>> The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting >>> in >>> bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [1], a second >>> time in >>> March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [2]. >>> Another >>> test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other >>> compiler regressions on these architectures. >>> >>> I would like to see some partial test rebuilds (like buildd or minimal >>> chroot >>> packages) for other architectures. Any possibility to setup such a test >>> rebuild >>> for some architectures by the porters? Afaics the results for the GCC >>> testsuite >>> look okish for every architecture. >>> >>> I'll work on fixing the build failures in [2], help is of course >>> appreciated. >>> Almost all build failures are analyzed and should be easy to fix (exceptions >>> e.g. #746883). Patches for the ones not caused by the Debian packaging may >>> be >>> found in distributions already using GCC 4.9 as the default compiler (e.g. >>> Fedora 21). >>> >>> If anything goes well, and a large amount of build failures are fixed, I >>> plan to >>> make GCC 4.9 the default for the C/C++/ObjC/Obj-C++ frontends at the end of >>> May, >>> beginning of June. >>> >>> Bugs reports for packages building with a legacy version of GCC (4.6, 4.7, >>> 4.8) >>> will be filed. >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html >>> [2] >>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.9;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org >>> >>> >>> -- >>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ia64-requ...@lists.debian.org >>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact >>> listmas...@lists.debian.org >>> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/536ba1ce.9070...@debian.org >> > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5371fb4e.9090...@debian.org
