On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 17:34 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Hiroyuki, > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Jo Shields <direct...@apebox.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 17:08 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > >> Package: mono > >> Tags: patch > >> > >> Please fix the ppc64 compilation error: > >> > >> http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=mono&arch=ppc64&ver=3.0.6%2Bdfsg2-9&stamp=1384751932 > > > > Is this sufficient to fix later issues with building on ppc64? As per > > http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=mono&arch=ppc64&ver=3.2.3%2Bdfsg-3&stamp=1385928050 > > > > I'm not too interested in making ports-only fixes to the package in sid, > > as my efforts are focused on the newer version in experimental right now > > - I'd only want to pull this fix in if it *really* fixes the build, not > > just makes it fail a little later. > > > Could you please try the above patch and let us know if this is > sufficient to build mono on ppc64 ?
If a PPC64 porterbox were available (or a ppc64 chroot on partch, given it's already got a 64-bit kernel), then it would be much easier to test and fix issues in Mono and similar porting-required packages, as it would remove the upload-wait-buildlog-upload-wait-buildlog cycle from testing. This is my general objection to adding new debian-ports architectures to the Mono packages - I want to be able to test things and I can't. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
