Good news first. It becomes more tedious to track the bug-free
packages. Besides the usual serious bugs, the following issues remain:
- wxwindows2.2 is still unbuildable in unstable, not yet removed
from unstable, package maintainer does not respond. Oh fun!
- postgresql: doesn't go to testing
Now that the kernel-image packages supports hw emulation of i486
instructions on i386 hardware, I'd like to change the code generation
to default to i486 (not sure if it should be tuned for any other
target, i.e. -mtune=i686).
IIRC the Hurd can be built for i586 only, so it could be used as the
While having built and uploaded things correctly for experimental, I
didn't do the same for unstable, which now needs some manual
intervention building gnat-4.1 and gcj-4.1.
gnat-4.1 (mips mipsel s390 sparc):
- work in a sid chroot
- install gnat-4.1-base libgnat-4.1 libgnatprj4.1
The plans for the GCC 4.2 transition were described in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/06/msg8.html
Does any port still need to stick with GCC 4.1 for a while? Feedback
from hppa, mips*, s390, powerpc, amd64, i386 porters doesn't show
objections against the transition.
Package: kfreebsd-5
Severity: important
Usertag: build-depends-gcc-3.4
The package build-depends on gcc-3.4 and/or g++-3.4, which we will remove
for the lenny release. Please build the package with the default compiler
currently found in unstable.
The severity of this report is likely to be
Package: kfreebsd-6
Version: 6.3-2
Severity: important
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-3.4
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc.
Please keep this report open until the
Besides m68k hopelessly being behind we do have serious problems on
alpha, arm and hppa.
- on arm, the bytecode compiler (ecj) doesn't produce correct code.
there is currently a workaround to build the package on arm using
byte-compiled code built on another architecture. Aurelian has
Hi,
openjdk-6 in unstable is updated to the 6b14 code drop, built from a recent
IcedTea snapshot. There are a few regressions in the ports which don't use the
hotspot VM, but the Zero VM. Help from porters would be appreciated.
There are two new binary packages offering additional JVMs:
-
Besides the open license issue, are there any objections from port maintainers
to make GCC-4.4 the default?
As a first step that would be a change of the default for C, C++, ObjC, ObjC++
and Fortran.
I'm not sure about Java, which show some regressions compared to 4.3. Otoh it's
not amymore
Package: kfreebsd-7
Version: 7.3-7
Severity: normal
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.3
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++.
Please keep this report open
Package: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.1-5
Severity: normal
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.3
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++.
Please keep this report open
Any news about this? It looks like there exists a port for openjdk-6 too, see
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/java/openjdk6/
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/java/openjdk7/
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 09.09.2010 22:47, Torsten Werner wrote:
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Matthias Klosed...@debian.org wrote:
Any news about this? It looks like there exists a port for openjdk-6 too,
see
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/java/openjdk6/
On 10.09.2010 20:42, Tuco wrote:
There's trouble when building the kernel with GCC 4.4. I got this
panic during boot:
thanks for checking. works 4.5 (for squeeze+1)?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
For wheezy I'm planning to change the linking behaviour for DSOs (turning on
--as-needed and --no-copy-dt-needed-entries. The rationale is summarized in
http://wiki.debian.org/ToolChain/DSOLinking. I would like to know about issues
with these changes on some of the Debian ports, and if we need
On 15.11.2010 07:16, Roland McGrath wrote:
mattst88 airlied_, does Fedora use --as-needed by default? Fedora 14 too?
airlied_ mattst88: yes
The naming of the options makes people easily confused.
--no-add-needed is the only option Fedora's gcc passes.
yes, OpenSuse is using --as-needed,
On 14.11.2010 16:06, Roger Leigh wrote:
While I understand the rationale for --no-copy-dt-needed-entries for
preventing encapsulation violations via indirect linking, I don't agree
with the use of --as-needed *at all*. If a library has been explicitly
linked in, it shouldn't be removed. This
On 14.11.2010 13:19, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 15:43:57 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
For wheezy I'm planning to change the linking behaviour for DSOs
(turning on --as-needed and --no-copy-dt-needed-entries. The
rationale is summarized in
http://wiki.debian.org/ToolChain
On 16.11.2010 01:24, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:02:57PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 14.11.2010 16:06, Roger Leigh wrote:
While I understand the rationale for --no-copy-dt-needed-entries for
preventing encapsulation violations via indirect linking, I don't agree
On 16.11.2010 10:42, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:14:09AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 14.11.2010 13:19, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 15:43:57 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
For wheezy I'm planning to change the linking behaviour for DSOs
(turning
severity 615826 important
thanks
On 28.02.2011 11:21, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Source: gcc-4.6
Version: 4.6-20110227-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
User: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
Usertags: kfreebsd
Hi,
your package FTBFS on kfreebsd-* with:
| /bin/bash ./libtool --tag=CC
On 28.02.2011 12:49, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Matthias Klose d...@debian.org (28/02/2011):
wasn't built before.
strictly speaking, yes. But since we're talking about a gcc package,
that *could* be considered as a regression from previous versions… But
what a hairy reasoning!
maybe
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many surprises
on at least the common architectures. About 50% of the
On 02.03.2011 07:36, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
On 2 March 2011 03:34, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote:
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
default
compiler
On 02.03.2011 17:54, Martin Guy wrote:
On 2 March 2011 02:34, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote:
armel (although optimized for a different processor)
Hi
For which processor (/architecture) is it optimized, and do you mean
optimized-for, or only-runs-on?
I ask in case this would mean
On 04/19/2011 11:11 PM, Ondřej Surý wrote:
reopen 621878
reassign 621878 gcj-4.4-jdk
retitle 621878 gcj-4.4-jdk misses jni_md.h on kfreebsd
affects 621878 +db4.6 db4.7 db4.8 db
thank you
Dear Debian GCC Team please look at http://bugs.debian.org/621878, it
looks like jni_md.h header is missing
reassign 621878 db5.1
thanks
you have to include both java_home/include and java_home/include/linux.
On 04/20/2011 07:20 AM, Ondřej Surý wrote:
Just a quick note, the difference in gcj version between successful and
unsuccessfull build is 4.4.5-9 vs 4.4.5-14
Ondřej Surý
On 20.4.2011, at
Apparently gcc-4.5 is not good enough as a bootstrap compiler for gcc-4.6.
Please could somebody check/confirm that using gcc-4.4 as the bootstrap compiler
works around the build failure?
thanks, Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 04/17/2011 09:33 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any other
On 04/26/2011 05:31 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
On 26 April 2011 18:03, Matthias Klosed...@debian.org wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the default after the release of
GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at least on amd64, armel, i386 and
powerpc.
Could you include armhf in the list as well?
On 04/26/2011 09:28 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 08:51:04PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the
default after the release of GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at
least on amd64, armel, i386
On 06/11/2011 12:04 AM, Christoph Egger wrote:
If you have further questions please mail debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
yes, please attach a patch.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
afaik, this is a buildd issue. any comments?
On 08/09/2011 08:44 PM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
Package: src:gcc-4.6
Version: 4.6.1-3
Severity: serious
Tags: help
From the buildd logs on kfreebsd-amd64[1]:
gengtype: Internal error: abort in get_output_file_with_visibility, at
A re-worked multiarch patch for gcc-4.5 is in the packaging repository,
currently lacking support for the hurd and kfreebsd. Please update the support,
as soon as possible, and check the implementation on mips*.
Basically either MULTIARCH_DIRNAME or MULTILIB_OSDIRNAMES has to be set
accordingly
On 08/19/2011 11:03 AM, Christoph Egger wrote:
Hi!
Christoph Eggerchrist...@debian.org writes:
Matthias Klosed...@debian.org writes:
afaik, this is a buildd issue. any comments?
On 08/09/2011 08:44 PM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
From the buildd logs on kfreebsd-amd64[1]:
gengtype: Internal
looks like bug #637236 is back again. is this a buildd issue again? can the
package be built locally?
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Please have a look at the gcc-4.7 package in experimental, update patches (hurd,
kfreebsd, ARM is fixed in svn), and investigate the build failures (currently
ia64, but more will appear).
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Package: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.2-15
Severity: important
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.4
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++, or
with gcc-4.6/g++-4.6.
Package: kfreebsd-9
Version: 9.0~svn227451-7
Severity: important
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.4
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++, or
with
GCC-4.7 packages are now available in testing and unstable; thanks to Lucas'
test rebuild, bug reports are now filed for these ~330 packages which fail to
build with the new version [1]. Hints how to address the vast majority of these
issues can be found at [2].
I'm planning to work on these
On 06.04.2012 04:03, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
reopen 654783 debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
notfixed 654783 python2.7/2.7.3~rc2-2
found 654783 python2.7/2.7.3~rc2-2
thanks
Log of the latest kfreebsd build failure is:
Hi,
I'm now planning to default to GCC 4.7 for amd64 and i386. Should kfreebsd and
the hurd do change at the same time, or should these stay with 4.6?
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On 27.04.2012 14:44, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Matthias Klose, le Fri 27 Apr 2012 14:31:16 +0200, a écrit :
I'm now planning to default to GCC 4.7 for amd64 and i386. Should kfreebsd
and
the hurd do change at the same time, or should these stay with 4.6?
I have actually already commited
On 27.04.2012 15:03, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 27/04/12 13:31, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'm now planning to default to GCC 4.7 for amd64 and i386. Should kfreebsd
and
the hurd do change at the same time, or should these stay with 4.6?
In case it is relevant to this decision:
gcc-4.6
GCC 4.7 is now the default for x86 architectures for all frontends except the D
frontends, including KFreeBSD and the Hurd.
There are still some build failures which need to be addressed. Out of the ~350
bugs filed, more than the half are fixed, another quarter has patches available,
and the
On 07.05.2012 19:35, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Matthias Klose dixit:
GCC 4.7 is now the default for x86 architectures for all frontends except
the D
frontends, including KFreeBSD and the Hurd.
How are the plans for other architectures?
I don't have plans to change any other architectures
Please could somebody look at the python3.3 build for kfreebsd, and provide the
missing patches?
thanks, Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
binutils 2.23 in experimental fails to build on kfreebsd for some time. please
could some of the ports look at the build failures and submit patches upstream?
thanks, Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On 05.10.2012 09:59, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 23:10:16 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User:
release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock
this should go to wheezy, because
- wrong code gen fixes - the ARM vector
On 07.10.2012 18:29, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
Hi,
The Internal error: abort in get_output_file_with_visibility, at
gengtype.c:1998, seen sometimes on kFreeBSD, seems to be here:
[...]
checked in both changes. will wait until -11 migrates, or if not, upload -12 to
unstable.
thanks,
python3.3 build failure on kfreebsd and the hurd, please could somebody have a
look and propose a patch?
thanks, Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
It's time to change the Java default to java7, and to drop java support on
architectures with non-working java7.
Patches for the transition to Java7 should be available in the BTS, mostly
submitted by James Page. Some may be still lurking around as diffs in Ubuntu
packages, apologies for that.
Am 30.05.2013 14:05, schrieb Christoph Egger:
Most of them probably only get fixed once openjdk-7 is default-jdk and
there seems to unfortunately still be the hang on kfreebsd-i386
during the build, or the check target?
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Am 07.05.2013 15:25, schrieb Matthias Klose:
The decision when to make GCC 4.8 the default for other architectures is
left to the Debian port maintainers.
[...]
Information on porting to GCC 4.8 from previous versions of GCC can be
found in the porting guide http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8
Am 13.06.2013 21:47, schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
Matthias Klose dixit:
The Java and D frontends now default to 4.8 on all architectures, the Go
frontend stays at 4.7 until 4.8 get the complete Go 1.1 support.
I’d like to have gcj at 4.6 in gcc-defaults for m68k please,
until the 4.8 one
Am 13.06.2013 16:46, schrieb Steven Chamberlain:
Hi,
On 13/06/13 13:51, Matthias Klose wrote:
GCC 4.8 is now the default on all x86 architectures, and on all ARM
architectures (the latter confirmed by the Debian ARM porters). I did not
get
any feedback from other port maintainers, so
Am 17.08.2013 16:21, schrieb Christoph Egger:
Moin!
Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org writes:
On 16/08/13 13:15, Christoph Egger wrote:
I talked to rene here at DebConf. The problems did show up in the past
when running the testsuite (hangs). Rene tried with current OpenJDK on
falla
Am 29.10.2013 17:48, schrieb Ian Jackson:
(Mind you, I have my doubts about a process which counts people
promising to do work - it sets up some rather unfortunate incentives.
I guess it's easier to judge and more prospective than a process which
attempts to gauge whether the work has been
please see http://bugs.debian.org/732282
Is there anybody who wants to maintain openjdk for these architectures? If not,
I'll go ahead and make gcj-jdk the default again on those architectures and
request removal of the kfreebsd and sparc binaries.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
gcc-4.9 is uploaded to experimental, asking the porters to watch for build
failures and corresponding patches. See
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gcc-4.9suite=experimental
These are already fixed in the vcs.
- fixed the gospec.c ftbfs on archs without ld.gold
- fixed the g++
Package: gcc-4.9
Severity: important
Disabling libcilkrts for kfreebsd and the Hurd for now.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52d13096.7010...@debian.org
Am 16.12.2013 11:34, schrieb Matthias Klose:
Package: java-common
Version: 0.50
Severity: serious
Tags: jessie, sid
openjdk-7 currently ftbfs on sparc, sparc64, s390, kfreebsd-any. So please
either remove the default-* packages on these archs, or fall back to gcj.
- the hotspot port
Am 16.01.2014 13:31, schrieb Aníbal Monsalve Salazar:
For mips/mipsel, I - fix toolchain issues together with other developers at
ImgTec
It is nice to see such a commitment, however in the past I didn't see any such
contributions.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Am 31.03.2014 19:50, schrieb Steven Chamberlain:
tags 743131 + patch jessie sid
clone 743131 -1
reassign -1 src:eclipse-cdt
found -1 eclipse-cdt/8.3.0-1
thanks
Hi,
On 31/03/14 17:49, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
Therefore, would that be an acceptable course of action for you if I
restrict the
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
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
Package: kfreebsd-8
Version: 8.3-6+deb7u1
Severity: important
Tags: sid jessie
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.6, gcc-4.6-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of
Package: kfreebsd-9
Version: 9.0-10+deb70.6 9.2-2
Severity: important
Tags: sid jessie
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.6, gcc-4.6-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default
Hi,
in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56274 Arnaud Charlet proposes to
remove the KFreeBSD Ada support upstream, unless somebody cares about the port.
Please can the Debian gnat maintainers or the Debian KFreeBSD porters forward
the KFreeBSD changes upstream? It currently builds
Package: python3.4
Version: 3.4.1-3
Severity: serious
Tags: sid jessie
BEGIN pystone static
cd /«PKGBUILDDIR»/build-static ./python ../Lib/test/pystone.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File ../Lib/test/pystone.py, line 277, in module
main(loops)
File ../Lib/test/pystone.py, line 68,
Package: freebsd-glue
Version: 0.2.16
Severity: important
Tags: sid jessie
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.7, gcc-4.7-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of
Package: kfreebsd-10
Version: 10.0-6
Severity: important
Tags: sid jessie
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.7, gcc-4.7-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of
Am 28.08.2014 um 18:08 schrieb Steven Chamberlain:
reassign 759558 gcj-4.9-jdk
found 759558 gcc-4.9/4.9.1-9
thanks
gcj-4.9-jdk isn't a source package, so the BTS seems a little confused
about who to mail about this bug; I don't think the maintainers were
notified. The original bug report
Package: src:openjdk-8
Version: 8u40~b04-2
Severity: important
see the buildd logs
SetupNativeCompilation(BUILD_LIBATTACH)
[2] LIBRARY := attach
[3] OUTPUT_DIR := /«PKGBUILDDIR»/build/jdk/lib/amd64
[4] SRC := /«PKGBUILDDIR»/src/jdk/src/solaris/native/sun/tools/attach
[5] EXCLUDE_FILES :=
Control: severity -1 important
Am 12.09.2014 um 12:47 schrieb Thibaut Paumard:
Package: gdc
Version: 4.9.1-4
Severity: grave
Hi,
gdc currently depends on libphobos-4.9-dev, including on kfreebsd-*, but
libphobos-4.9-dev is not beeing built on these architectures.
It may be that the
Am 12.09.2014 um 15:13 schrieb Thibaut Paumard:
While it's your prerogative to decrease the severity, please note that
this bug means that all the packages that build-depend on gdc (22
packages in jessie) are currently in an FTBFS-state on kfreebsd.
sure, and they still will ftbfs without
Am 25.09.2014 um 23:10 schrieb Jonathan Wiltshire:
Hi,
The results of the final architecture qualification will soon be published.
In there is reference to a number of concerns about the kFreeBSD port and
its place in Jessie.
We want to recognise that you have put in a lot of work
Package: src:binutils
Version: 2.24.90.20141014-1
Severity: important
The testsuite shows around 190 test failures on both i386 and amd64. Please
could a porter have a look?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On 03/19/2015 11:25 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
Matthias Klose wrote:
I forwarded this upstream.
Many thanks for that.
I can't find this in the bug tracker or public mailing lists, but if
they need anything before the patches can be merged, please let me know.
I was told, that your
Package: src:gcc-5
Version: 5-20150327-1
Severity: important
Tags: stretch sid
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gcc-5suite=experimental
s-taprop.adb:749:17: clock_getres is undefined
../gcc-interface/Makefile:305: recipe for target 's-taprop.o' failed
make[8]: *** [s-taprop.o]
Package: src:gcc-5
Version: 5-20150410-1
Severity: important
the libgccjit tests fail on kfreebsd, hang the buildds, and get killed with a
timeout. Please see the build logs. As a workaround, I'll disable running these
on these targes, so please find the build logs at
On 21.10.2015 23:23, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
Control: tags -1 + patch
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-kfreebsd-amd64/include/jni.h:45:20:
fatal error: jni_md.h: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.
the header is now included in include/bsd instead
Package: src:openjdk-8
Version: 8u66-b01-6
Severity: important
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-kfreebsd-amd64/include/jni.h:45:20: fatal error:
jni_md.h: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.
the header is now included in include/bsd instead of include/linux. Was this an
intended
On 08/31/2015 03:42 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> YunQiang Su wrote:
>> +ifeq ($(DEB_TARGET_ARCH_OS),kfreebsd)
>> : # multilib builds without b-d on gcc-multilib (used in
>> FLAGS_FOR_TARGET)
>> +ln -sf /usr/include/$(DEB_TARGET_MULTIARCH) $(builddir)/sys-include
>> +else
>>
any update on this? debian-java currently thinks about moving forward with
openjdk-8.
Hutchings
- Aurelien Jarno
- Matthias Klose
On 18.01.2016 13:34, Svante Signell wrote:
This file is for GNU/Hurd, the kFreeBSD file to patch is src/gcc/ada/s-osinte-
kfreebsd-gnu.ads.
my bad. now applied.
Control: severity -1 important
Control: tags -1 + help
On 09.08.2016 09:12, Christian Marillat wrote:
> Package: libgcc-6-dev
> Version: 6.1.1-11
> Severity: grave
>
> I'm unable to build a package because crtfastmath.o is missing from this
> package. Architecture is kfreebsd-i386. I don't see
Package: src:kfreebsd-10
Version: 10.3~svn300087-2
Severity: serious
Tags: sid stretch
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-5, gcc-5-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default
On 10.09.2016 09:59, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10-09-16 00:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> - fpc not available on powerpc anymore (may have changed recently)
>
> For whatever it is worth, this was finally fixed this week. It is
> missing on mips*, ppc64el and s390
While the Debian Release team has some citation about the quality of the
toolchain on their status page, it is not one of the release criteria documented
by the release team. I'd like to document the status how I do understand it for
some of the toolchains available in Debian.
I appreciate that
On 20.09.2016 23:46, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 09/20/2016 11:16 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>- powerpc: No porter (RM blocker)
>
> I'd be happy to pick up powerpc to keep it for Stretch. I'm already
> maintaining powerpcspe which is very similar to powerpc.
No, you are not
On 15.09.2016 22:43, Helge Deller wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On 10.09.2016 00:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> While the Debian Release team has some citation about the quality of the
>> toolchain on their status page, it is not one of the release criteria
>> documented
&
Package: kfreebsd-10
Version: 10.3~svn300087-1
Severity: important
Tags: sid stretch
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-5, gcc-5-legacy
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version
[CCing porters, please also leave feedback in #835148 for non-release
architectures]
On 29.09.2016 21:39, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As brought up on the meeting last night, I think we should try to go for
> PIE by default in Stretch on all release architectures!
> * It is a substantial
Package: src:gcc-7
Severity: important
Tags: sid buster
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
KFreeBSD maintainers, please fix and submit patches upstream.
/bin/bash ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile /«PKGBUILDDIR»/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/«PKGBUILDDIR»/build/./gcc/
Apparently X-Debbugs-CC doesn't add up, so the ports lists didn't get a
notification yet ...
Please see
#845159 [i| | ] [src:gcc-7] gcc-7: gnat fails to build on kfreebsd-*
#861734 [i| | ] [src:gcc-7] gcc-7 fails to build gnattools on armel
#861735 [i| | ] [src:gcc-7] gcc-7 fails to build
According to [1], binutils 2.31 (currently in experimental) will branch in about
a week, and I'll plan to upload the branch version to unstable. Test results
are reported to [2], these look reasonable, except for the various mips targets,
however as seen in the past, it doesn't make a
GCC 8 is available in testing/unstable, and upstream is approaching the first
point release. I am planning to make GCC 8 the default at the end of the week
(gdc and gccgo already point to GCC 8). Most runtime libraries built from GCC
are already used in the version built from GCC 8, so I don't
On 07.07.18 17:24, YunQiang Su wrote:
> Niels Thykier 于2018年6月28日周四 上午4:06写道：
>> List of concerns for architectures
>> ==
>>
>> The following is a summary from the current architecture qualification
>> table.
>>
>> * Concern for ppc64el and s390x: we are dependent
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
