-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 W dniu 23.01.2014 18:57, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer pisze: > I've tried to summarize the current arm64 situation. The following are my > conclusions, feel free to point if something is wrong, give more > info/feedback, etc.
As you know from my blog post [0] Qt/AArch64 patch has long history. 0. http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/2014/01/20/the-story-of-qtaarch64-patching/ > = Stuff under debian/ > > - As explained in a mail before, we don't like the idea of passing > -fpermissive as it can lead to very strange crashes. The code will need > proper > fixing. > > - We are building webkit with a separate source, -no-javascript-jit and the > relevant webkit patches should be applied in src:qtwebkit. The relevant > patches contained in the patch submitted by Wookey come from Riku Voipio and > seems too similar to other patches we already have there, so it should not be > a problem to apply them once we have Qt4 ready form arm64. > - It uses linux-g++ instead of linux-g++-64. While that could be the best > fit, > it would be good to know why. Maybe it is because linux-g++ may use '-m64' argument for GCC which AArch64 does not support so build fails. > = Code patches > > aarch64.patch: > - *No copyright* nor license. We need this at least to be able to apply it > and > ask upstream if they see it fit. There's the chance that some code comes from > Ubuntu people. > - Webkit stuff: as described above. If you need that for something: Author: Marcin Juszkiewicz <mar...@juszkiewicz.com.pl> based on gtkwebkit changes by Riku Voipio <riku.voi...@linaro.org> License: same as upstream one > aarch64_fix_atomic_set.patch: > - Copyright present. > - Possibly needs the above patch applied. It requires aarch64.patch as it just change two lines. > = Some extra remarks > > We need at least the proper copyright and license for the patches. In that > way > I'm able to apply them in the package and ping upstream wrt them. > > Of course, if the original author can push it to upstream's gerrit the > better, > because in case some objection arises I don't need to be in the middle as a > (possibly noisy) proxy. Qt4 patches are not accepted upstream. All new code has to go to Qt5 and since 5.2.0 QAtomics stuff is using std::atomic so compiler takes care of it and there is no code for separate architectures. And all required patches were submitted - just one change to qtwebkit is stuck in review. https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-35442 is upstream bug. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS5owyAAoJECbKqQEReiUedDgQAIoJP8WhTIA+w08/LfuHsGMa gVI5vEtIsMb+IkMDPqFNmWok1//ocmdXPCJJPFRsHT7Nuy2z8I4pmmZFTzG6llgr zrbKb5mP3MCb6/tzv17YtOi3e8Inrz9+Z6YqdMEmhEtnKEO9llLQ55Af1n9ot7NP xB5OSGgWZSmwVpABEuO6+Ehg4wwyjciclC2JJFHUkTgEYjN4fzBDFGg007qS7fNe Q5jArjHnwXyfNFKsdtKWLbh/52IpwXm9t0Sa5OxqWjdmwmAnLo2YHDLrJWlLI1Of 4M7N36ph57huNuuN8pEuLgwM7BHhicK4EoDhjPD4dKisGUwTOaEGGhZMB+d1EjiQ pOCO8NUehWm96JvMmihv1Zb+j2R3q4q8zwwXK1nUQThTTBEE5Mdg63D5TAcHPV5P sL2GjaaKqHgePnQLrxekmZiSHNmfrjcJw12naTGUPsrf+tK4hZ3qGlHwznAKOKwn ZgJEH8mFiTRBNZ83gHSjP8j9NXiHCaxiRNFUL38e6dnYyNyEdz6zB+U4CyaHuEPR h7GQCyVapvHDe5PrA0aXIjVAAQQTw6TI57Ct4lYBdHqDNvBQZIvLr4lP8EYLWVhA gCdia6C7sbjGb96Gio8W8RtEuxhywh+g0wgndgWkF7RjMTXJxw4CFzOi/5WiTdQf topl5mzNXk+tvnb4jn6R =oz85 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
