Re: [Rd] R 4.0.0 build error with sysdata.rda on ppc64el architecture

2020-04-30 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 30 April 2020 at 09:42, Iñaki Ucar wrote: | On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 02:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > And to keep the list abreast, this appears to be related to the long double | > issue on powerpc where needed an extra #define to ensure compilation. That [...] | Which reminds me that [1]

Re: [Rd] R 4.0.0 build error with sysdata.rda on ppc64el architecture

2020-04-30 Thread Iñaki Ucar
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 02:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > > On 29 April 2020 at 11:22, peter dalgaard wrote: > | Hum, at least it is not Apple, so maybe you can attach a debugger to the > running process? (gdb -p process_id or something like that --- haven't > actually done it for a decade).

Re: [Rd] R 4.0.0 build error with sysdata.rda on ppc64el architecture

2020-04-29 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 29 April 2020 at 11:22, peter dalgaard wrote: | Hum, at least it is not Apple, so maybe you can attach a debugger to the running process? (gdb -p process_id or something like that --- haven't actually done it for a decade). Then at least we can get a stack trace and a clue about where it

Re: [Rd] R 4.0.0 build error with sysdata.rda on ppc64el architecture

2020-04-29 Thread peter dalgaard
Hum, at least it is not Apple, so maybe you can attach a debugger to the running process? (gdb -p process_id or something like that --- haven't actually done it for a decade). Then at least we can get a stack trace and a clue about where it is looping. Diddling optimization options can also

[Rd] R 4.0.0 build error with sysdata.rda on ppc64el architecture

2020-04-28 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
The R 4.0.0 package migration on Debian is being held back by a failed build on ppc64el [1]. We can see from the history of builds logs [2] that it used to build, briefly failed, worked again and then failed leading to R 4.0.0's release. (And my bad for missing how the alpha1/alpha2/beta/rc