Re: Unofficial sparc64 porterboxes? (For problem unreproducible in Qemu)

2016-05-16 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
On 05/16/2016 09:58 AM, Christian Seiler wrote: > My problem is that under qemu-system-sparc64 [2] I simply cannot > reproduce this problem, the test suite of mksh passes when compiled > against dietlibc. (The other bugs that I could reproduce, see e.g. > the problems in the sid version [3], I was

Re: Definition of __sparc64__ in gcc

2016-05-16 Thread David Miller
From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 14:23:08 +0200 > Hello! > > While looking at the FTBFS of Firefox, I noticed that Firefox, more > precisely ipc/chromium was checking for the definition of __sparc64__ > to configure the code for sparc64 [1]. >

Definition of __sparc64__ in gcc

2016-05-16 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hello! While looking at the FTBFS of Firefox, I noticed that Firefox, more precisely ipc/chromium was checking for the definition of __sparc64__ to configure the code for sparc64 [1]. However, when looking at the actual gcc configuration dump, it's apparent that __sparc64__ is actually not used

Re: Unofficial sparc64 porterboxes? (For problem unreproducible in Qemu)

2016-05-16 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hi Christian! On 05/16/2016 09:58 AM, Christian Seiler wrote: > Therefore it would be good if I could access to some real hardware > to figure out this problem. Is there such a possibility? Yes, this is absolutely possible. For this, please send me a private email with the following data: -

Bug#824449: firefox: FTBFS on sparc64 due to wrong platform definitions

2016-05-16 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Source: firefox Version: 46.0.1-1 Severity: normal Tags: patch User: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc64 Hi! I have had a look at the firefox package on sparc64 and I was able to detect two problems with platform definitions which prevent an almost successful build on this

Unofficial sparc64 porterboxes? (For problem unreproducible in Qemu)

2016-05-16 Thread Christian Seiler
Hi, I'd like to ask if I could get access to an unofficial sparc64 box? (There are no official porterboxes, as I've been told by DSA.) I'm currently investigating unit test failures of mksh when compiled with dietlibc on sparc64 (I co-maintain dietlibc, and mksh's test suite is very good at