gnat-4.1/gcj-4.1 manual builds needed on alpha, arm, m68k, mips, mipsel, s390, sparc

2007-06-10 Thread Matthias Klose
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

GCC 4.2 transition

2007-07-20 Thread Matthias Klose
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.

java status on the ports

2008-02-06 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Proper way to specify Java build-dep

2008-05-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Adam C Powell IV writes: On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 16:58 +0200, Michael Koch wrote: On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 10:23:41AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: Greetings, My package babel recently closed bug 477845 by changing a build dependency from java-gcj-compat to default-jdk-builddep.

OpenJDK Cacao GCJ Java defaults in unstable

2009-03-15 Thread Matthias Klose
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: -

Re: Sparc release requalification

2009-08-19 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.08.2009 22:43, Jurij Smakov wrote: Hello, I would like to point out that sparc release requalification is currently placing it in at risk position for squeeze release. The most serious problems with the port are lack of developer involvement (there is currently one active porter/developer

Re: Sparc release requalification

2009-08-19 Thread Matthias Klose
On 19.08.2009 13:42, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:16:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: I did speak with Martin Zobel at Debconf on how to get there, having two proposals: - define a new sparc64 port, and bootstrap this one using the 32bit port. This is rather easy. I

Re: Sparc release requalification

2009-08-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 19.08.2009 16:33, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:55:24PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 19.08.2009 13:42, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:16:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: I did speak with Martin Zobel at Debconf on how to get there, having two

any objections from port maintainers to make gcc-4.4 the default?

2009-09-20 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Sparc release requalification

2009-09-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 06.09.2009 16:49, Jurij Smakov wrote: On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:20:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 19.08.2009 16:33, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:55:24PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 19.08.2009 13:42, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:16:36PM

Re: Sparc release requalification

2009-09-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 20.08.2009 16:52, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Bastian Blank a écrit : On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:16:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: I did speak with Martin Zobel at Debconf on how to get there, having two proposals: - define a new sparc64 port, and bootstrap this one using the 32bit port

DSO linking changes for wheezy

2010-10-29 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: DSO linking changes for wheezy

2010-11-15 Thread Matthias Klose
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,

Re: DSO linking changes for wheezy

2010-11-15 Thread Matthias Klose
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

libffi 3.0.10 rc8 test results

2011-04-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Here are some test results for various linux ports, ran on Debian unstable: builds logs (except for mips) can be found at: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libffisuite=experimental i386 and amd64 look ok. arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi: XPASS: libffi.call/cls_longdouble.c -O0 -W -Wall

Re: GCC-4.5 as the default for (at least some) architectures

2011-04-26 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: GCC-4.5 as the default for (at least some) architectures

2011-04-26 Thread Matthias Klose
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?

please update patches / investigate build failures for gcc-4.7 snapshot builds

2011-12-18 Thread Matthias Klose
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-s390-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

GCC 4.7 is now the default for x86 architectures

2012-05-07 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: GCC 4.7 is now the default for x86 architectures

2012-05-07 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: ppl-1.0 tests fail to build on s390/s390x

2013-01-29 Thread Matthias Klose
[CCing the debian s390 porters] Am 29.01.2013 09:32, schrieb Roberto Bagnara: I just hit the wrong button on the administrative interface of the ppl-devel mailing list. So the message has gone forever before I could read it. Please resend it to the list and accept my apologies. Kind

Re: ppl-1.0 tests fail to build on s390/s390x

2013-01-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 30.01.2013 01:17, schrieb Matthias Klose: [CCing the debian s390 porters] Am 29.01.2013 09:32, schrieb Roberto Bagnara: I just hit the wrong button on the administrative interface of the ppl-devel mailing list. So the message has gone forever before I could read it. Please resend

Re: [PPL-devel] ppl-1.0 tests fail to build on s390/s390x

2013-02-06 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 31.01.2013 10:11, schrieb Roberto Bagnara: On 01/31/13 00:01, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 30.01.2013 01:17, schrieb Matthias Klose: [CCing the debian s390 porters] Am 29.01.2013 09:32, schrieb Roberto Bagnara: I just hit the wrong button on the administrative interface of the ppl-devel

changing the java default to java7, and dropping java support for some architectures

2013-05-06 Thread Matthias Klose
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.

Re: Current and upcoming toolchain changes for jessie

2013-06-13 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Current and upcoming toolchain changes for jessie

2013-06-14 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Current and upcoming toolchain changes for jessie

2013-06-14 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Current and upcoming toolchain changes for jessie

2013-06-17 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 15.06.2013 03:22, schrieb Stephan Schreiber: GCC-4.8 should become the default on ia64 soon; some other changes are desirable: - The transition of gcc-4.8/libgcc1 to libunwind8. - A removal of the libunwind7 dependency of around 4600 packages on ia64 - when they are updated next time

status of s390 toolchain maintenance

2013-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Hi, yesterday Aurelian Jarno did switch the GCC default to 4.8 in the VCS. However I don't see him in the Debian GCC maintainer list as GCC port maintainer. In the past I only did see s390 contributions and s390 related bug triage from Bastian Blank. Is this change coordinated with Bastian?

Re: Switch default GCC to 4.8 on s390x

2013-11-18 Thread Matthias Klose
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 12.11.2013 15:40, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: Hi all, The s390x architecture is still using GCC 4.6 as the default compiler, while most other architectures have already switched to GCC 4.8. It starts to cause problem for building packages: some

Re: Switch default GCC to 4.8 on s390x

2013-11-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 23.11.2013 03:33, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 09:09:18AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 12.11.2013 15:40, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: Hi all, The s390x architecture is still using GCC 4.6 as the default compiler, while most other architectures have already switched

Re: Switch default GCC to 4.8 on s390x

2013-11-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 23.11.2013 13:52, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:44:04AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 23.11.2013 03:33, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 09:09:18AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Am 12.11.2013 15:40, schrieb Aurelien Jarno: Hi all, The s390x

Bug#732282: stop building java for sparc, sparc64, s390, kfreebsd-any

2013-12-16 Thread 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 for linux sparc isn't maintained anymore by upstream.

gcc-4.9 uploaded to experimental

2014-01-10 Thread Matthias Klose
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++

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing

2014-01-21 Thread Matthias Klose
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

preparing for GCC 4.9

2014-05-08 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: The (uncalled for) toolchain maintainers roll call for stretch

2016-09-10 Thread Matthias Klose
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

The (uncalled for) toolchain maintainers roll call for stretch

2016-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

2016-09-23 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Enabling PIE by default for Stretch

2016-09-30 Thread Matthias Klose
[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

preparing for binutils-2.31

2018-06-15 Thread Matthias Klose
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 and binutils updates for buster

2018-07-17 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

2018-12-09 Thread Matthias Klose
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

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

2019-04-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 13.04.19 17:01, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >>> How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the >>> time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. > >> The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the >> deb,

gcc-8 and gcc-9 builds using pgo and lto optimization

2019-07-08 Thread Matthias Klose
The recent gcc-8 and gcc-9 uploads to unstable are now built using pgo and lto optimization. Not on all architectures, see debian/rules.defs. On the plus side the compilers are 7-10% faster, however the build time of the compiler is much longer, adding 10-20 hours. If people feel that this