Fine with me.
—
Antoine
> On 16 Apr 2024, at 13:01, Caspar Schutijser wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:15:18AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>>> On 2024/04/12 17:57, Caspar Schutijser wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This port builds successfully on arm64. I did not test this
>>> at runtime.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:15:18AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2024/04/12 17:57, Caspar Schutijser wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This port builds successfully on arm64. I did not test this
> > at runtime. It's possible it builds on armv7 too these days
> > since the BROKEN message is the same
On 2024/04/12 17:57, Caspar Schutijser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This port builds successfully on arm64. I did not test this
> at runtime. It's possible it builds on armv7 too these days
> since the BROKEN message is the same but I can't test it on
> armv7.
I suggest removing BROKEN-armv7 as well, the
Sure.
—
Antoine
> On 12 Apr 2024, at 17:57, Caspar Schutijser wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This port builds successfully on arm64. I did not test this
> at runtime. It's possible it builds on armv7 too these days
> since the BROKEN message is the same but I can't test it on
> armv7.
>
> Comments or
Hi,
This port builds successfully on arm64. I did not test this
at runtime. It's possible it builds on armv7 too these days
since the BROKEN message is the same but I can't test it on
armv7.
Comments or OKs?
Caspar
Index: Makefile
