Processing control commands:
> tag 653582 wheezy-ignore
Bug #653582 [ruby1.9.1] Segfaults when running ruby-hpricot's test suite on ia64
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #653582 to the same tags previously set
> tag 593141 wheezy-ignore
Bug #593141 [src:ruby1.9.1] ruby1.9.1: FTBFS on ia64: te
Processing control commands:
> tag 653582 wheezy-ignore
Bug #653582 [ruby1.9.1] Segfaults when running ruby-hpricot's test suite on ia64
Added tag(s) wheezy-ignore.
> tag 593141 wheezy-ignore
Bug #593141 [src:ruby1.9.1] ruby1.9.1: FTBFS on ia64: test suite segfaults
Added tag(s) wheezy-ignore.
--
Control: tag 653582 wheezy-ignore
Control: tag 593141 wheezy-ignore
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:11:56 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:21:57PM +0100, Stephan Schreiber wrote:
> > For now I'd prefer the 'wheezy-ignore' rather than removing the ia64
> > ruby package.
>
>
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:21:57PM +0100, Stephan Schreiber wrote:
> I took a look at this a few weeks ago.
>
> The problem is the code in the cont.c file which implements continuations.
> A thread saves its own stack and its thread context itself while it
> is running. The ruby programmers believ
I took a look at this a few weeks ago.
The problem is the code in the cont.c file which implements continuations.
A thread saves its own stack and its thread context itself while it is
running. The ruby programmers believe that that the saved info can be
used by another thread to switch over.
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 06:13:31PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:22:00 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:20:07 +0100
> > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > Dear release team, at some point before the wheezy release, we need to
> > > decide what to
What is broken about it? Has anyone estimated how much effort it would take
to fix? Are we talking needing assembly language bindings or just some dumb
SIGBUS error?
Patrick Baggett
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Michael Stapelberg dijo [Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:22:00AM +0
Michael Stapelberg dijo [Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:22:00AM +0100]:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:20:07 +0100
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Dear release team, at some point before the wheezy release, we need to
> > decide what to do with Ruby 1.9.X on ia64. It has been broken for
> > months, and hasn't seen
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:22:00 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:20:07 +0100
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Dear release team, at some point before the wheezy release, we need to
> > decide what to do with Ruby 1.9.X on ia64. It has been broken for
> > months, and hasn't se
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:20:07 +0100
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Dear release team, at some point before the wheezy release, we need to
> decide what to do with Ruby 1.9.X on ia64. It has been broken for
> months, and hasn't seen any activity in Debian (#539141) or upstream
> (http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 21:51:28 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 16/01/12 at 21:20 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > ruby1.9.1 is known to be broken on ia64 (see #593141). It currently
> > builds only because the test suite is disabled on that architecture, but
> > the fact that other Ruby packag
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 09:51:28PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 16/01/12 at 21:20 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > ruby1.9.1 is known to be broken on ia64 (see #593141). It currently
> > builds only because the test suite is disabled on that architecture, but
> > the fact that other Ruby packa
On 16/01/12 at 21:20 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> ruby1.9.1 is known to be broken on ia64 (see #593141). It currently
> builds only because the test suite is disabled on that architecture, but
> the fact that other Ruby packages fail to build on ia64 doesn't surprise
> me.
>
> Dear release team,
(Adding -ia64 to Cc)
On 15/01/12 at 12:42 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> reassign 653582 ruby1.9.1
> retitle 653582 Segfaults when running ruby-hpricot's test suite
> thanks
>
> Hi,
>
> I do not have access to IA64 hardware, but this smells much like a bug
> in Ruby itself, in which ruby-hpricot's
reassign 653582 ruby1.9.1
retitle 653582 Segfaults when running ruby-hpricot's test suite
thanks
Hi,
I do not have access to IA64 hardware, but this smells much like a bug
in Ruby itself, in which ruby-hpricot's tests trip. I think the proper
course is to report this to the upstream bugtracker, b
Source: ruby-hpricot
Version: 0.8.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: fails to build from source
User: debian-i...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ia64
ruby-hpricot FTBFS on ia64:
| /usr/bin/ruby1.8 -I/usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby
/usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/gem2deb/test_runner.rb
| Loaded suite debian/ru
16 matches
Mail list logo
