Re: Bug#995223: libffi: SIGILL on powerpc and ppc64 systems since libffi8

2021-09-28 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hello! On 9/29/21 00:38, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > There is actually a baseline violation on i386 as "-march=amdfam10" is > passed to the compiler, see the build log in [1], for example. Comparing the build logs, it seems that this an issue with the newer version of autoconf that was use

Re: Bug#995223: libffi: SIGILL on powerpc and ppc64 systems since libffi8

2021-09-28 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hi! On 9/28/21 22:40, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > We should therefore pass "--enable-portable-binary" in debian/rules. There is actually a baseline violation on i386 as "-march=amdfam10" is passed to the compiler, see the build log in [1], for example. Adrian > [1] > https://buildd.debi

Re: Bug#995223: libffi: SIGILL on powerpc and ppc64 systems since libffi8

2021-09-28 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Control: severity -1 serious Hello! It turns out that m4/ax_gcc_archflag.m4 contains code to detect the baseline of the host system and sets the GCC architecture accordingly. Thus, a libffi compiled on a POWER8 machine will not work on a POWER5 machine as the compiler is emitting POWER8 instruct