Thanks. Using architecture-is-64-bit makes sense. You do not need to
urgently upload this change since armhf has never seen a successful
build. I initially falsely thought that this package was affected by the
64-bit time_t transition.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
I've pushed the change to salsa, so future versions of rocr-runtime will
be restricted to 64-bit architectures [1]. However, I'm not sure it's
worth uploading a new version of the package just for that. I'll wait
and see for a couple weeks if there are any more bugs reported before
making another
Note that no version of rocr-runtime has ever built successfully for
armhf. rocr-runtime should probably be limited to amd64, arm64 and
ppc64el (as those are the only architectures that have driver support
from AMDGPU KFD).
I've been cautious about dropping architectures that successfully built
** Description changed:
rocr-runtime 5.7.1-2 fails to build on armhf (with 64-bit time_t):
In file included from /<>/src/core/inc/runtime.h:62,
from /<>/src/core/util/lnx/os_linux.cpp:62:
/<>/src/core/inc/signal.h:155:58: error: static assertion
failed: Bad SDMA time
** Description changed:
rocr-runtime 5.7.1-2 fails to build on armhf (with 64-bit time_t):
In file included from /<>/src/core/inc/runtime.h:62,
from /<>/src/core/util/lnx/os_linux.cpp:62:
/<>/src/core/inc/signal.h:155:58: error: static assertion
failed: Bad SDMA time
** Description changed:
rocr-runtime 5.7.1-2 fails to build on armhf (with 64-bit time_t):
In file included from /<>/src/core/inc/runtime.h:62,
- from /<>/src/core/util/lnx/os_linux.cpp:62:
+ from /<>/src/core/util/lnx/os_linux.cpp:62:
