Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
+++ Renato Golin [2014-10-09 15:55 +0100]: Release 3.4 had the old AArch64 back-end that is now deprecated and removed. I wouldn't bother with that, as it could bring a lot of incompatibility issues between 3.4 and 3.5. For all purposes, AArch64 support in LLVM begins with 3.5. OK, in that case can we just mark 3.3 and 3.4 as 'not built on arm64'? I assume nothing build-deps on them. Sylvestre? Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
On 09/10/2014 17:15, Wookey wrote: +++ Renato Golin [2014-10-09 15:55 +0100]: Release 3.4 had the old AArch64 back-end that is now deprecated and removed. I wouldn't bother with that, as it could bring a lot of incompatibility issues between 3.4 and 3.5. For all purposes, AArch64 support in LLVM begins with 3.5. OK, in that case can we just mark 3.3 and 3.4 as 'not built on arm64'? I assume nothing build-deps on them. Sylvestre? Actually, it was already disabled. Just a temp directory to create to make dh_install happy I am going to upload that soon. S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
+++ Sylvestre Ledru [2014-10-09 17:20 +0200]: On 09/10/2014 17:15, Wookey wrote: +++ Renato Golin [2014-10-09 15:55 +0100]: Release 3.4 had the old AArch64 back-end that is now deprecated and removed. I wouldn't bother with that, as it could bring a lot of incompatibility issues between 3.4 and 3.5. For all purposes, AArch64 support in LLVM begins with 3.5. OK, in that case can we just mark 3.3 and 3.4 as 'not built on arm64'? I assume nothing build-deps on them. Sylvestre? Actually, it was already disabled. Just a temp directory to create to make dh_install happy I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. You are talking about the debugger, I am talking about the whole package. If 3.4 is best not used on arm64, then why are we building it at all on this arch. Because cross-compilers (i.e used of 3.4 but other back-ends)? Because build-deps? Similar questions for 3.3. I am going to upload that soon. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
On 09/10/2014 18:29, Wookey wrote: +++ Sylvestre Ledru [2014-10-09 17:20 +0200]: On 09/10/2014 17:15, Wookey wrote: +++ Renato Golin [2014-10-09 15:55 +0100]: Release 3.4 had the old AArch64 back-end that is now deprecated and removed. I wouldn't bother with that, as it could bring a lot of incompatibility issues between 3.4 and 3.5. For all purposes, AArch64 support in LLVM begins with 3.5. OK, in that case can we just mark 3.3 and 3.4 as 'not built on arm64'? I assume nothing build-deps on them. Sylvestre? Actually, it was already disabled. Just a temp directory to create to make dh_install happy I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. You are talking about the debugger, I am talking about the whole package. If 3.4 is best not used on arm64, then why are we building it at all on this arch. Because cross-compilers (i.e used of 3.4 but other back-ends)? Because build-deps? Similar questions for 3.3. OK. My bad :) I don't have any opinion on this. I am not restricting the arch in the packaging. But you have to know that there are packages explicitly depending on 3.4 (ghc for example). About 3.3, see bug 753965 Sylvestre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
+++ Sylvestre Ledru [2014-10-09 18:36 +0200]: On 09/10/2014 18:29, Wookey wrote: I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. You are talking about the debugger, I am talking about the whole package. If 3.4 is best not used on arm64, then why are we building it at all on this arch. Because cross-compilers (i.e used of 3.4 but other back-ends)? Because build-deps? Similar questions for 3.3. OK. My bad :) I don't have any opinion on this. I am not restricting the arch in the packaging. But you have to know that there are packages explicitly depending on 3.4 (ghc for example). OK, well if ghc needs it and it does in fact build then clearly we should be building it. So yes, go ahead with the fixed upload. Cheers for the speedy responses. Once that builds then llvm-defaults should work too, I presume. About 3.3, see bug 753965 OK, that's going away, which if good from my POV :-) Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
On 09/10/2014 18:52, Wookey wrote: +++ Sylvestre Ledru [2014-10-09 18:36 +0200]: On 09/10/2014 18:29, Wookey wrote: I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. You are talking about the debugger, I am talking about the whole package. If 3.4 is best not used on arm64, then why are we building it at all on this arch. Because cross-compilers (i.e used of 3.4 but other back-ends)? Because build-deps? Similar questions for 3.3. OK. My bad :) I don't have any opinion on this. I am not restricting the arch in the packaging. But you have to know that there are packages explicitly depending on 3.4 (ghc for example). OK, well if ghc needs it and it does in fact build then clearly we should be building it. So yes, go ahead with the fixed upload. Cheers for the speedy responses. building :) Once that builds then llvm-defaults should work too, I presume. FYI, llvm-defaults should already work since the default is now 3.5! About 3.3, see bug 753965 OK, that's going away, which if good from my POV :-) mine too ;) S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
Package: llvm-toolchain-3.4 Version: 1:3.4.2-10 Severity: normal Tags: patch User: debian-...@lists.debian.org Usertag: arm64 This package failed to build on arm64. Log here: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=llvm-toolchain-3.4arch=arm64ver=1%3A3.4.2-10stamp=1411813219 The errors seems to be: debian/rules override_dh_install make[1]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' debian/rules:364: warning: overriding recipe for target 'override_dh_install' debian/rules:349: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'override_dh_install' dh_install --fail-missing cp: cannot stat 'debian/tmp/build-llvm/Release/lib/python2.7/site-packages/lldb/': No such file or directory dh_install: cp -a debian/tmp/build-llvm/Release/lib/python2.7/site-packages/lldb/ debian/python-lldb-3.4//usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages// returned exit code 1 make[1]: *** [override_dh_install] Error 2 I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you have any sugestions of where to look to get to the bottom of this? The arm64 official porterbox is coming but is not get set up. In the meantime there is an unofficial porterbox that I can give access to if you send me an ssh key and account name. Wookey -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#764530: llvm-toolchain-3.4: FTBFS on arm64
On 08/10/2014 22:41, Wookey wrote: Package: llvm-toolchain-3.4 Version: 1:3.4.2-10 Severity: normal Tags: patch User: debian-...@lists.debian.org Usertag: arm64 This package failed to build on arm64. Log here: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=llvm-toolchain-3.4arch=arm64ver=1%3A3.4.2-10stamp=1411813219 The errors seems to be: debian/rules override_dh_install make[1]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' debian/rules:364: warning: overriding recipe for target 'override_dh_install' debian/rules:349: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'override_dh_install' dh_install --fail-missing cp: cannot stat 'debian/tmp/build-llvm/Release/lib/python2.7/site-packages/lldb/': No such file or directory dh_install: cp -a debian/tmp/build-llvm/Release/lib/python2.7/site-packages/lldb/ debian/python-lldb-3.4//usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages// returned exit code 1 make[1]: *** [override_dh_install] Error 2 I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you have any sugestions of where to look to get to the bottom of this? The arm64 official porterbox is coming but is not get set up. In the meantime there is an unofficial porterbox that I can give access to if you send me an ssh key and account name. Disabling lldb should be enough. OK with me doing that? Cheers, Sylvestre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
