Re: Installing Squeeze on an Ultra 5

I installed squeeze on an Ultra 10. My disks run on a SCSI controller PCI card, but the CD-ROM was still IDE. I didn't have any I/O errors with that...but then again, the amount of I/O might have been insignificant compared to a full IDE disk-based system (did a net install after booting from the

Re: Sparc 6.0.3: multiple Nautilus file manager process after few minutes from fresh install

I had this problem too. I just used XFCE 4 instead, but it isn't a problem specific to SPARC. The fix looked annoying when I read it and I don't really like Gnome anyways... http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=525718 I think this is what you are looking for. On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at

Re: Sparc 6.0.3: multiple Nautilus file manager process after few minutes from fresh install

Obviously, assuming that those are the only 4 RC bugs affecting sparc would be very naive. But if people do not bother reporting them, we'll never take any action, and release will proceed, again leading to complaints along the lines of I can't believe this buggy stuff was deemed a stable

Re: Sparc 6.0.3: multiple Nautilus file manager process after few minutes from fresh install

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=570955 looks like the same problem, for i386/amd64. Reported Feb 2010. Experienced Debianers -- is this good strategy: add more info to that and/or bring it to the forefront? Patrick On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Josip Rodin

Re: problem installing squeeze 6.0.4 on SunBlade 150 -- stalls (?)

I'm not very qualified to respond, but it looks like you've got a Raptor gfx card in there, and I don't think it is supported by Linux right now. The on-board ATI Mach64 card does work under Linux. Could you try removing it and seeing if you can do the install with just the on-board graphics? That

Re: Bug#653653: nbd: FTBFS on sparc: Bus error (core dumped) - FAIL: integrity

According to g_int64_equal documentation, it expects its arguments to be pointers to gint64 values, which on sparc must be aligned on an 8-byte boundary. Looks like this is intentional, because nbd-tester-client.c creates its hash table like that: That's odd that it would be 4-byte

Re: Bug#653653: nbd: FTBFS on sparc: Bus error (core dumped) - FAIL: integrity

Where can I read the source for nbd-tester-client.c? I just did a quick scan of ghash.c but I didn't see anything really silly going on, so I'd like to check this file. All copies I can find of nbd-tester-client.c seem to be short (600 lines) and not use glib at all. Patrick On Sat, Mar 3, 2012

Re: powerbutton

I hate to be that guy, but what *is* the problem? The messages? Did the error messages say something specifically that is going to happen? If you feel up to it, you can try out a newer kernel (I'm running 3.2 on an Ultra 10) and see if the messages persist, and if so, you can report a bug.

Re: powerbutton

at 09:20:46AM -0500, Patrick Baggett wrote: I hate to be that guy, but what *is* the problem? The messages? Did the error messages say something specifically that is going to happen? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble

Re: gcc: Internal Compiler error: Bus error randomly occurs.

I haven't had any bus errors while compiling, and I do a fairly good bit of it on a Sun Ultra 10 (UltraSPARC IIi, not IIIi like the Blade 2500). Do have a *.c/*.cpp test case I can try to compile that gives you SIGBUS? Also, what version of GCC are you using? Patrick On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:09

Re: gcc: Internal Compiler error: Bus error randomly occurs.

right now I am having this system compile the Linux kernel without Xorg running which when Xorg was running the Bus Error happened with the unaligned access errors. So it may just be this driver bug I have been having. Kieron On 04/02/2012 10:57 AM, Patrick Baggett wrote: I haven't had any

Re: gcc: Internal Compiler error: Bus error randomly occurs.

with the kernel http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=648766 that I am going to try and set up a kernel debugging environment and start trying to find the problem. I feel like all these problems I have are related. -Kieron On 04/02/2012 01:10 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote: I run Xorg

Re: Any experience with Radeons on SPARC?

I got a GeForce MX 4000 to run OpenArena using a Sun Ultra 10. It crashes after a while, but when I first started, it didn't even really run X, much less full accelerated OpenGL. What SPARC system are you using? I've found that while the GF4 worked, a GeForce 8400GS didn't even get recognized

Re: http://developer.gaisler.net/debian/ sparc32 wheezy repostitory

Packages are one thing but...Didn't the linux kernel drop SPARCv7/8 support? I remember reading their atomic ops and they uses 'cas' and 'casx' which are very clearly sparcv9 instructions. It might have been a conditional code path On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Alexander Feld

Re: *May I submit you for this high focus, high paying CIRRUS LOGIC position?*

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM, b...@inncareers.com wrote: Hello! *May I submit you for this high focus, high paying Cirrus Logic position?* No, I don't think this is what the mailing list is for.

Re: sparc qualification for Wheezy

Adam, I didn't see where GCC was dropping 32-bit sparc upstream in the changelogs. This seems inaccurate since a 64-bit userland has negative performance implications, and this is true for both Solaris and Linux and not recommended by anyone. A 64-bit userland is barely available for Linux --

Re: sparc qualification for Wheezy

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.ukwrote: On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 13:44 -0500, Patrick Baggett wrote: I didn't see where GCC was dropping 32-bit sparc upstream in the changelogs. This seems inaccurate since a 64-bit userland has negative performance

Re: sparc qualification for Wheezy

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas zo...@debian.orgwrote: Hi, On Wed May 16, 2012 at 13:19:48 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Hi, With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears, we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of

Re: Oracle Sun T5120 support getting better in debian 6.0.5 ?

I'm about 99% sure that Debian has run 64-bit SPARC kernels for a while now, just that few packages are compiled for it. Unlike x86, most binaries are faster as 32-bit code unless they make use of = 3GB RAM and/or 64-bit integer calculations. As a result, only stuff like databases, webservers, or

Re: Sun Fire V210 NIC's don't work

So you did apt-get install firmware-linux-nonfree and still no go? I didn't seem to have any problems with this, though it was on an ia64 machine. Patrick On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Kaya Saman kayasa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I attempted to configure a second nic on my server and added

Re: Sun Fire V210 NIC's don't work

Right, no problems except for this: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/licenses/solaris-cluster-express-license-167852.html That's right, the EULA. You probably haven't read it, but I have, and in particular, this clause is more problematic than the GPL, FSF, or BSD license ever will be: Except

Re: Install Linux on Ultra Sparc 10

I had this issue when I used a UPA (read: unsupported) graphics board. When I used the built in PGX64 (mach64) board, I got VGA out. It's not to say that with a UPA board it doesn't work, just that Linux doesn't detect it as a framebuffer, and so it outputs to the serial console. I didn't have a

Re: problem with lesstif2 installation

http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/sparc/lesstif2/filelist (From http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/sparc/lesstif2) It looks like it has *.so files in the package. I just downloaded it and the size of the *.deb matches the site. Maybe you can do some checking? 1) Do you not have

Re: problem with lesstif2 installation

as 606kB. So, I don't really know what size it actually is! Best regards, Fred On 01/14/2013 12:19 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote: http://packages.debian.org/**squeeze/sparc/lesstif2/**filelisthttp://packages.debian.org/squeeze/sparc/lesstif2/filelist (From http://packages.debian.org

Re: QLogic PTI firmware

It appears to be part of the Linux kernel source too. linux-2.6/firmware/qlogic/isp1000.bin.hex It may be the same firmware and may not be the problem. Patrick On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:45 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd markmll.debian-sp...@telemetry.co.uk wrote: What's the recommended way to get

Re: Call for iceweasel testing

The backtrace seems to very different. That is in the JIT compiler, while the bug report seems to be in perhaps a general interpreter? Patrick On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Hartwig Atrops hartwig.atr...@arcor.dewrote: Hello. This evening, I tested the packages from wooyd.org on my Blade

Re: Call for iceweasel testing

Jurij, The backtrace for Hartwig is in some kind of SPARC JIT compiler for JavaScript. Notice the *.S files dealing with SPARC assembly. Your backtrace showed a completely separate area -- perhaps dealing with bytecode it appears? If there is some option to enable/disable SPARC JIT for

Re: liburcu sparc support, build failure on buildd

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com wrote: Hi, I notice the following build failure here https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=liburcu Tail of log for liburcu on sparc: urcu/static/wfqueue.h:84:2: warning: implicit declaration of

Re: Multiscreen systems

Hi Mark, I've not tried that combination. I do have to ask though, why so old versions? Etch is 4.0, and Lenny is 5.0. I think we're closer to 7.0 right now (wheezy), with 6.0 being the current stable version. I'd imagine that there are a number of bug fixes in between that might help your

Re: Help with Wheezy CD testing on Saturday

It is an HP zx6000, an Itanium (ia64) machine. Please ignore; it was probably CCd to the wrong lists. Patrick On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd markmll.debian-sp...@telemetry.co.uk wrote: Peter Chubb wrote: Émeric == Émeric Maschino emeric.masch...@gmail.com writes:

Re: sparc / Problems with 3.2-kernel

I have a dual US-III in a Sun Blade 2500 running 3.9 and it's stable for me, but I don't recall having any problems with 3.2 either. Patrick On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 4:38 PM, BERTRAND Joël joel.bertr...@systella.frwrote: Andreas Barth a écrit : Hi, today I tried to resurrect our buildd on

Re: qemu FTBFS on sparc: conflicting types of tcflag_t?

Hi Michael, If the problem is definitively a system header problem, can you create a mostly-empty *.c file that has the two includes to demonstrate the problem? I can try to reproduce it on my machine at home. Also, if you have the time, can you check the headers themselves for #ifdefs or

Re: Sparc avaiable

I think you guys should say where you are located. I might be, but not if it is across the ocean. :-) On Jun 23, 2013 6:10 PM, M. Dietrich m...@emdete.de wrote: Hi all, i have a spare sun sparc laying around collecting dust in my wardrobe. anyone interested in it for porting and the like?

Re: SIGBUS libcrypto in Wheezy/Sparc

Hmm, I think I can debug this if you can give me steps to reproduce it. Is it just when you start up the program? Patrick On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Jersey Man jerse...@yahoo.com wrote: Unaligned access? Get this when running 'sipp' or 'freeswitch' when compiled with SSL support.

Re: SIGBUS in elfutils

Short version: likely looks like a bug in the *.c code, should use memcpy() instead of type-punning when the alignment is unknown. Long version: The 'ldd' instruction is *l*oa*d* *d*ouble word, i.e. load 64-bit value. 0xf7d182fc is 4-byte aligned, but not 8-byte aligned, so 'ldd' faults and

Re: Compiling vanilla kernel issues.

I didn't have any problems, but I'm not using initramfs. To build a kernel 'the debian way', you might need to find a guide or maybe someone else can chime in? On Sep 18, 2013 10:05 PM, Kieron Gillespie ciaran.gilles...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everyone, Was wondering if anyone had any success

Re: Compiling vanilla kernel issues.

messages about the disks it finds. Alternatively, if you know the model of the system (e.g. Sun Ultra 80), then you can look up the hardware / drivers using your favorite search engine or see if anyone knows off hand on the list. Good luck! Patrick Baggett On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Kieron

Re: Compiling vanilla kernel issues.

recently stop working after 3.8.x series. On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.comwrote: I didn't have any problems, but I'm not using initramfs. To build a kernel 'the debian way', you might need to find a guide

Re: Removing old unmaintained X drivers

Off the top of my head, my Sun E3500 (8x 64-bit SPARC CPUs) has an SBUS graphics adapter that is one of those cg{N} adapters, but honestly, Linux support for E3500 is shoddy at best, so it's fine by me. Patrick On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: On Thu, Sep

Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)

I'm interesting in helping on ia64. I'm not fluent in ia64 assembly, but I can get around pretty well. I'm very experienced in C/C++/Java and debugging. I've got a fully functional system running Xorg/Mesa3D/sound, so I can reproduce, test, and fix issues as time permits. Patrick Baggett On Wed

Re: sparc64 buildd gcc SIGSEGV/SIGBUS?

I can't say that I track failing packages (how does one do this?) but stupid question -- are the versions of gcc on your machine and sompek(2) identical? What about kernel version (it probably doesn't matter, but you never know on some of these RISC ports). Also, I'll try to reproduce it locally

Re: sparc64 buildd gcc SIGSEGV/SIGBUS?

to. So with that all mentioned, is the end goal to produce a 64-bit binary or 32-bit binary? Patrick On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Steven Gawroriski ste...@multiphasicapps.net wrote: On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:41:35 -0500 Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com wrote: I can't say that I

Re: sparc64 buildd gcc SIGSEGV/SIGBUS?

2013 12:40:47 -0500 Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com wrote: So this is the sparc64 version of debian, not sparc? The reason I ask is because (IIRC) the default mode in sparc is to output 32-bit SPARC code but utilizing the SPARCv9 instructions (i.e. not able to be run on pre

Re: [Need HELP!] Please help to test kernel patch (sparc64, NUMA)

OK, I have a Sun Blade 2500 (2x UltraSPARC III) I can use to test. I'll try to get to this this weekend. Patrick On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:56 AM, Kirill Tkhai tk...@yandex.ru wrote: Hi, I'm looking for a person who has sparc64 machine with NUMA. The patch below adds NUMA kernel text

Re: [Need HELP!] Please help to test kernel patch (sparc64, NUMA)

Kirill, I copied the contents of your email into a patch file, and when I did git apply --check, it didn't really work: figgles@ghost:~/sparc-numa/sparc$ git apply --check numa.patch error: patch failed: arch/sparc/include/asm/trap_block.h:138 error: arch/sparc/include/asm/trap_block.h: patch

Re: MySQL on T2000

Just from reading others' questions and answers over the web, I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, especially if you are doing anything that needs an FPU in there. Also IIRC, they are in-order CPUs, which means having proper compiler flags will make a difference. Stock MySQL from Debian

Re: MySQL on T2000

. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Rainer Herbst Zentrale Einrichtung für Informations- verarbeitung und Kommunikation (ZEIK) Universität Potsdam Am Neuen Palais 10, Haus 8, Zimmer 0.70a 14469 Potsdam Tel. 0331 - 977 1039 Quoting Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com: Just from

Re: MySQL on T2000

Yes, it does [1], and so does Solaris using SunPro CC using -xmemalign [2] [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/2013-March/012435.html [2] https://blogs.oracle.com/d/entry/the_meaning_of_xmemalign On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 3:39 PM, brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net

Re: MySQL on T2000

sand...@crustytoothpaste.net wrote: On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:50:37PM -0600, Patrick Baggett wrote: Yes, it does [1], and so does Solaris using SunPro CC using -xmemalign [2] Okay, what's happening here is that someone is forcing the compiler to generate multiple aligned loads

Re: lnav/0.7.0-2: FTBFS on mips, powerpc, s390x and sparc

Seems like a tiny fix, as mentioned by the owner tstack in line_buffer.cc(185). Upstream should be able to do this easily. this-lb_file_time = *((int32_t *)gz_id[4]); should be something to the effect of: this-lb_file_time = (gz_id[4]) | (gz_id[5] 8) | (gz_id[6] 16) | ( gz_id[7] 24); to

Re: Problem with sunvdc driver in Solaris 11 LDOM installation

Hi Claas, Welcome to the Debian SPARC mailing list! I think LDOMs are poorly supported by Debian and perhaps Linux in general. If you search debian sparc ldom in Google, there are a hits about various problems, but one statement [1] in particular sums up what I thought: current state of linux in

Re: Sparc status ?

I really don't understand why this 32-bit gone myth is happening. It was poor wording at least. Debian doesn't even support the ancient 32-bit sparc CPUs. Modern SPARC ABIs (post 1997) require 64-bit CPUs even when running in 32-bit code, it's like x32 ABI in x86 land. SPARCv7, SPARCv8 = old

Re: Sparc status ?

] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Le 18/04/2014 14:16, Patrick Baggett a écrit : I really don't understand why this 32-bit gone myth is happening. It was poor wording at least. Debian doesn't even support

Re: Sparc status ?

I don't understand, there is no warning of abi or architecture deprecation in the release notes of gcc, neither 4.7 nor 4.8. Maybe they have information I don't, but I doubt it. I'll dig in the gcc mailing list to see if I can find something related. Sébastien Doh, beat me to it by a

Re: Sparc status ?

Because GCC maintainers have been saying for years, that they are unwilling to support the weird use case of Debian sparc port, which has 64-bit kernel but 32-bit userspace. I can find discussions about it going back as far as 2009:

Re: Sparc status ?

Because GCC maintainers have been saying for years, that they are unwilling to support the weird use case of Debian sparc port, which has 64-bit kernel but 32-bit userspace. I can find discussions about it going back as far as 2009: Also, a lot of the messages about removing v8 support or

Re: Bug#745938: decide on the future of sparc in unstable

I still run Debian on three SPARC machines, so I am definitely interested. Patrick On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.orgwrote: Hi, Philipp Kern pk...@debian.org writes: now that sparc has been dropped from testing, please decide on the fate of sparc in

Re: Sparc status ?

The main problem is that the 2 new buildd are Niagara machines which are not really stable. It left only 2 buildd which seems to be quit old and slow. On my V240, the 3.13 kernel seems to be rock solid (I've been rebuilding the gcc package 3 times - 8hours build - without any issue).

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Le 28/04/2014 16:05, Patrick Baggett a écrit : strcmp() may well be implemented by word comparisons. But then it is the duty of the implementation to properly handle the ends of the strings even if those

Re: Sparc status ?

No, that is not accurate. The main reason is that there are a number of issues with the sparc port currently that are not being addressed because apparently nobody is interested enough in the sparc port to fix the issues. OK, what are the major issues and the bug # assigned to them? I'd

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Thomas Schmitt scdbac...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, sorry for mis-posting the first reply for bug 746254 to this bug 731806. Meanwhile it turned out that the SIGBUS vanishes if i do not compile with -O2 or if i replace a-u = by memcpy(). Could you explain the

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Thomas Schmitt scdbac...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, Patrick Baggett: Could you explain the context around this code? Perhaps the source is not really alignment safe and could use some patching upstream? I'd be happy to provide advice or code samples

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

Seb, Yes, I can reproduce this issue. { 1, 0 } { 1, 1 } returns 0, when it should return -1. Interestingly, if you use: { 1, 1, 1, 1, 0 } //i.e. 5 bytes { 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 } //i.e. 5 bytes as the strings, it returns -1. So it clearly has a problem if the string is exceptionally short. That

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Thomas Schmitt scdbac...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, I really need a disassembly and to be able to probe the runtime It's the job of a C union to provide a common hull around objects of different size. One may dispute whether using union is a good idea (like

Re: sparc has been pulled from jessie

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Well, folks, I think this is one step closer to the end. The sparc has been removed from the jessie archive. That's a shame cause the problem with the generation of the debian-installer is about to be fixed. There

Re: State of Haskell on sparc?

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Joachim Breitner nome...@debian.orgwrote: Hi everyone, one of the current Haskell release transitions blocker is the removal of some obsolete Haskell libraries, in particular haskell-tls-extra (https://bugs.debian.org/741230). According to dak rm -R -n

Re: Bug#745938: FWIW -- I consider sparc useful, pity if its support ends completely

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd markmll.debian-sp...@telemetry.co.uk wrote: Joël BERTRAND wrote: sun4u : kernel is stable until 2.6.32. All kernels since 2.6.33 hang with a deadlock or similar issue (UP and SMP) on U1E, U2, U5, U60, U80, U420, Blade2000. I have done

Re: State of Haskell on sparc?

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Richard Mortimer ri...@oldelvet.org.ukwrote: Hi, On 29/04/2014 17:26, Colin Watson wrote: Program received signal SIGBUS, Bus error. 0x003d8c2c in md5_do_chunk () (gdb) bt #0 0x003d8c2c in md5_do_chunk () #1 0x003d9a10 in md5_update () #2 0x003d2070

Re: Bug#745938: decide on the future of sparc in unstable

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.orgwrote: On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:36:31 +0200, Joël BERTRAND wrote: sun4u : kernel is stable until 2.6.32. [...] sun4v : I have several T1000 for a long time. I haven't seen any stable kernel on these servers.

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

Yes, that's the one. Interestingly, in glibc-2.19, this change is reverted. It is present in glibc-2.17 glibc-2.18 as released by GNU. Oddly, in glibc git, the buggy version appears. On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Lennart Sorensen lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote: On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.comwrote: Yes, that's the one. Interestingly, in glibc-2.19, this change is reverted. It is present in glibc-2.17 glibc-2.18 as released by GNU. Oddly, in glibc git, the buggy version appears. I've filed a bug

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

I kicked off a gcc build (gcc-4.8_4.8.2-21) last night. It didn't have an errors for me. I now have a bunch of *.deb files: figgles@ghost:~/src$ ls -1 *.deb cpp-4.8_4.8.2-21_sparc.deb g++-4.8-multilib_4.8.2-21_sparc.deb g++-4.8_4.8.2-21_sparc.deb gcc-4.8-base_4.8.2-21_sparc.deb

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

I tried to build the gcc-4.8-4.8.2-20 and the build is broken. libstdc++ and lib64stdc++ are not build, neither are build libgcc1. The last good build (with the missing libraries) is 4.8.2-16. Something broken on -20 and -21. Oh, I see what you're saying. I get lib64stdc++-dev /

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Le 30/04/2014 15:39, Patrick Baggett a écrit : I tried to build the gcc-4.8-4.8.2-20 and the build is broken. libstdc++ and lib64stdc++ are not build, neither are build libgcc1. The last good build

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Ivo De Decker ivo.dedec...@ugent.bewrote: Hi, On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 03:42:39PM +0200, Sébastien Bernard wrote: Indeed, the last good build seems to be gcc-4.8-4.8.2-19. Look at the changelog for the -20 they seems to have done something on the sparc

Re: Bug#746310: Acknowledgement (libc6: strcmp returns false equality between two strings)

This has been fixed upstream by David Miller and applied to all branches from glibc-2.15 all the way to master. It should be backported to wheezy and and definitely sid. Patrick On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Here's the bug filed against debian.

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

BTW, the sparc buildd looks like gcc 4-8.2-21 is successful and so is gcc-4.9.0-1. I've installed them from sid. Crisis averted? Patrick On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Sébastien Bernard sbern...@nerim.netwrote: Le 30/04/2014 20:36, Patrick Baggett a écrit : On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1

Re: the future of sparc in unstable

major bugs report and fix them. I haven't checked but I think that SILO is currently a version or two ahead of what debian is using for it's installs. That might be the issue. Wish I had more time to invest in this. -Kieron On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr

Re: preparing for GCC 4.9

Hi Matthias et al, I'd like to try to do some of this using my sparc box and see how far I get. Is there a link that explains how to set up these steps? Others seem to just know what to do, but I haven't the slightest idea of where to begin. I have a box with gcc-4.9, plenty of disk space, and

Re: problem booting Debian on X1

I forget the details of SILO, but the first stage (512-byte program) simply loads stage 2, which is just the program 'silo' itself, I thought. That probably doesn't change much version-to-version. [Others: please correct me if I am mistaken!] In that case, perhaps you could backup the old `silo`

Re: problem booting Debian on X1

Ah yeah, I forgot that after 1.4.14, the version number hasn't really increased (despite development). Can you figure out which Debian package you are using? On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Jeremy Kister debian-sp...@jeremykister.com wrote: On 7/21/2014 5:09 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote

Re: problem booting Debian on X1

wrote: On 7/21/2014 4:59 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote: please correct me if I am mistaken!] In that case, perhaps you could backup the old `silo` binary and replace it with the newest one? I would think that if you had a USB port you could do this pretty easily using a flash drive (perhaps PCI USB

Re: problem booting Debian on X1

://swoolley.org/man.cgi/1/builtins If you recently modified the layout of the disks, perhaps you need to just run 'silo' again to make sure that 'second.b' can be found? On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Jeremy Kister debian-sp...@jeremykister.com wrote: On 7/21/2014 4:59 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote

Re: problem booting Debian on X1

Even though I didn't solve it, I'm glad I could point you at least nearish to the answer :-) On Jul 21, 2014 7:31 PM, Jeremy Kister debian-sp...@jeremykister.com wrote: On 7/21/2014 8:10 PM, Jeremy Kister wrote: On 7/21/2014 7:48 PM, Jeremy Kister wrote: I would guess it's: /mnt/sbin # silo

Re: Problem implementing USB on Ultra 5/10

So if I'm understanding you correctly, when you don't have the card plugged in, your system boots normally, but when you do, it doesn't even make to the boot screen? Maybe you should check whether the card is correctly inserted into the slot. This sounds closer to a hardware error, not driver

Re: Problem implementing USB on Ultra 5/10

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:55 AM, BERTRAND Joël joel.bertr...@systella.fr wrote: Fred a écrit : Hello, A recent post mentioned having USB on a U10. I bought a StarTech PCIUSB7 card because it is said to be Linux compatible. With the PCI USB card installed the U5 flashes the keyboard leds

Re: Problem implementing USB on Ultra 5/10

On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Fred f...@blakemfg.com wrote: On 07/22/2014 12:18 PM, Aaro Koskinen wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 05:50:44AM -0700, Fred wrote: A recent post mentioned having USB on a U10. I bought a StarTech PCIUSB7 card because it is said to be Linux compatible.

Re: Wanted: sparc64 porterbox

Any modern SPARC kernel will run 64-bit sparc code, and the multilib gcc will generate both 32-code and 64-bit code. I believe that is enough, but I'm not 100% sure. Patrick On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Camm Maguire c...@maguirefamily.org wrote: Greetings! Does anyone know of an

Re: Wanted: sparc64 porterbox

. Is this possible? Instructions? Take care, Patrick Baggett baggett.patr...@gmail.com writes: Any modern SPARC kernel will run 64-bit sparc code, and the multilib gcc will generate both 32-code and 64-bit code. I believe that is enough, but I'm not 100% sure. Patrick On Mon, Aug

Re: Ultra-5 freezing

Hi Scar, When you say you are experiencing hard freezes, can you give a time frame? From you email it sounds like this: * Installed Wheezy (works 100% perfectly?) * Some time passes * Now, it hard freezes (at boot? after a minute? after an hour? one week?) I don't have problems with my Sun

Re: Debian Jessie regression under qemu-system-sparc64

It looks like the regression has been introduced sometime between 4th-8th November: - Works, boots to the Debian installer http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/sparc/20141104-00:20/mini.iso - Doesn't work, crashes as above

Re: Good news on Debian Sparc port stability

I would ask David S. Miller about the sparc ASM stuff - he seems to be the resident sparc genius and linux kernel maintainer. On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:18 PM, James Y Knight jykni...@google.com wrote: On Jun 4, 2015, at 11:07 AM, James Y Knight jykni...@google.com wrote: GLibc = After

Re: Debian drops support for sparc

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Sam Ravnborg s...@ravnborg.org wrote: But I think the focus should probably be on the sheer redness of the sparc columns at: https://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_qualify.html (current release) From the link above: sparc Upstream Support

Re: Debian drops support for sparc

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Sam Ravnborg s...@ravnborg.org wrote: But I think the focus should probably be on the sheer redness of the sparc columns at: https://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_qualify.html (current release) From the link above: sparc Upstream Support According to

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:20 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > > https://wiki.debian.org/PortsSparc > > > > Started a catagory of major bugs. Please place links and titles to > > the bug report in this list so we can better track the status and > > reference

Re: Bug#731806: debian-installer: FTBFS on sparc: genisoimage errors

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:35 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > On 11/12/2015 11:28 PM, Patrick Baggett wrote: > > If the output is -1, the bug has been fixed. If the output is 0, then > > the bug is still present. 0 indicates the two strin

Re: Resurrecting Debian on SPARC

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:32 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > On 09/15/2015 04:10 PM, waz0wski wrote: > > I would love to see Debian-on-SPARC continue on, even if not fully > > supported, similar to how the FreeBSD project handles sparc64[1] > > Ok, the

Re: Need help debugging silo

Nice job everyone! On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:18 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > On 12/29/2015 12:24 PM, Frans van Berckel wrote: > >> The unsigned long probably becomes 64 bit on sparc64. I'll check > >> whether Oracle has a patched version. > > > > The

Re: Need help: xsltproc segfaulting on sparc64

Hi Adrian, I have the time and skills (C programming / debugging), but no longer have sparc hardware. I've been reading the bug reports, and the stack trace that is 5381 levels deep seems to be quite a problem. Is this the same problem that sparc64 is having? What about the patch [1] that

Re: Debian Sparc 7.10.0 Install Problems

Hey Chris! Great to hear from a long-time sparc user. On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Chris wrote: >> >> Try our latest sparc64 build. It still has some rough edges, but you should >> be able to get the system installed. Has a much more recent kernel and >> userland: > > >

  1   2   >