Bug#592768: clisp install failure is a powerpc64 only problem?

2011-01-18 Thread Julien Cristau
user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertag 592768 squeeze-can-defer tag 592768 squeeze-ignore kthxbye On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 07:55:40 -0400, David Bremner wrote: Hi; It seems like the install problems for clisp might only be happening on powerpc64. There are several reports of

Processed: Re: Bug#592768: clisp install failure is a powerpc64 only problem?

2011-01-18 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: user release.debian@packages.debian.org Setting user to release.debian@packages.debian.org (was jcris...@debian.org). usertag 592768 squeeze-can-defer Bug#592768: clisp segfaults on install on powerpc system. There were no usertags set.

Bug#592768: clisp install failure is a powerpc64 only problem?

2011-01-14 Thread David Bremner
Hi; It seems like the install problems for clisp might only be happening on powerpc64. There are several reports of installation success on powerpc, and I verified myself on qemu-system-powerpc. Debian does not have any powerpc64 porterbox, so this is difficult for me to test. I'm not sure

Bug#592768: clisp install failure is a powerpc64 only problem?

2011-01-14 Thread Philipp Kern
David, am Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 07:55:40AM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben: Of course, if someone can duplicate the bug running a 32-bit kernel that changes things. I still think we probably need a powerpc64 porterbox if powerpc is going to continue as a release architecture post squeeze.

Bug#592768: clisp install failure is a powerpc64 only problem?

2011-01-14 Thread Mark Hymers
On Fri, 14, Jan, 2011 at 02:05:29PM +0100, Philipp Kern spoke thus.. David, am Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 07:55:40AM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben: Of course, if someone can duplicate the bug running a 32-bit kernel that changes things. I still think we probably need a powerpc64 porterbox