Control: reopen -1
The patch I just uploaded fixed the problem on my x86-64 box and plummer the
ppc64el porterbox.
However the same test still segfaults on armhf even with gcc-8.
I'll try to get another stacktrace and notify upstream.
X
Ximin Luo:
> Control: forwarded -1
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2/issues/4753
The segfault happens on all architectures and we were just unlucky that it
happened on the ones that we saw.
I've filed an upstream issue with a stack trace, will continue debugging later.
X
Pirate Praveen:
> On 18/07/18
On 18/07/18 6:39 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I don't think your last upload was a good idea as you apparently
> didn't test your change on all affected architectures. The testsuite
> still fails on mips64el and ppc64el.
The previous upload was failing only on amrhf so thought fixing
Hello Pirate!
On 07/18/2018 01:03 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> I ran dpkg-buildpackage with gcc-8 in
>> build depends and export CC=gcc-8 in rules.
>
> gcc-defaults is soon going to switch gcc to gcc-8 by default, so
> all you have to do then is wait and ask the wanna-build team to
>
On 07/18/2018 12:57 PM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On 18/07/18 4:20 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> Did you run the testsuite?
>>
>
> testsuite is run during build.
Not if you run add "nobench nocheck" to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS like we
do in Debian Ports for some architectures or if you
On 18/07/18 4:20 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Did you run the testsuite?
>
testsuite is run during build. I ran dpkg-buildpackage with gcc-8 in
build depends and export CC=gcc-8 in rules.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 07/18/2018 12:30 PM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On 18/07/18 2:57 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>> So I think it gives a us bit more time until these switch away from gcc-6.
>>
>> No, it won't because any package that does not build with gcc-8 is considered
>> an RC bug. There is no way
On 18/07/18 2:57 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> So I think it gives a us bit more time until these switch away from gcc-6.
>
> No, it won't because any package that does not build with gcc-8 is considered
> an RC bug. There is no way around this other than fixing the build on gcc-8.
I
On 07/18/2018 11:13 AM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> reverse-depends -b gcc-6
> Reverse-Build-Depends
> =
> * caffe-contrib
> * eztrace-contrib
> * firefox-esr
> * grub2
> * kfreebsd-10
> * linux
> * lua-torch-cutorch
> * squid3
> * starpu-contrib
>
> So I think it gives a us bit
On 18/07/18 2:29 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 07/18/2018 10:34 AM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>> I was able to build it with gcc-6 installed and 'export CC=gcc-6' added
>> to debian/rules.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to build with gcc-6 in the short term?
>
> No. As gcc-6 is planned for
On 07/18/2018 10:34 AM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> I was able to build it with gcc-6 installed and 'export CC=gcc-6' added
> to debian/rules.
>
> Is it a good idea to build with gcc-6 in the short term?
No. As gcc-6 is planned for removal soonish, it's unfortunately not
a good idea.
If you're
Control: block 901011 by -1
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 09:58:36 +0530 Pirate Praveen
wrote:
> package: libgit2
> version: 0.27.0+dfsg.1-0.7
> severity: serious
>
> On harris.debian.org (armhf porterbox) I got this error.
>
> /home/praveen/libgit2-0.27.0+dfsg.1/tests/checkout/tree.c: In function
>
package: libgit2
version: 0.27.0+dfsg.1-0.7
severity: serious
On harris.debian.org (armhf porterbox) I got this error.
/home/praveen/libgit2-0.27.0+dfsg.1/tests/checkout/tree.c: In function
'test_che
ckout_tree__target_directory_from_bare':
13 matches
Mail list logo
