On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 04:09:41PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Sven Luther writes:
> > > That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
> > > interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
> > That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
> > interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
> > the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64
Sven Luther writes:
> BTW, is it possible to easily disable the tests in order to spare a few
> hours of build when experimenting like that. Having to wait 7 hours for
> the build to complete is, well, not very productive.
WITHOUT_CHECK=yes dpkg-buildpackage ...
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 10:44:10AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
> > BTW, is it possible to easily disable the tests in order to spare a few
> > hours of build when experimenting like that. Having to wait 7 hours for
> > the build to complete is, well, not very productive.
>
>
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
> > That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
> > interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
> > the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64
Sven Luther writes:
> That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
> interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
> the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64 target, but
> have it default to 32bit code by default. My early tries f
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 11:50:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:12:36AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > well, you need a lib64c6-dev as well. Unsure how much prepared the
> > glibc sources are and if the glibc maintainers are willing to include
> > such packages for
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:12:36AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> well, you need a lib64c6-dev as well. Unsure how much prepared the
> glibc sources are and if the glibc maintainers are willing to include
> such packages for sarge.
Absolutely not... the base system is frozen, remember?
I don't kn
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 12:44:16PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > It builds simple binaries without problems. But it didn't build the
> > > biarch toolchain, so it was of no use for me.
> > >
> > > After a bit of investigation, i found out that :
> > >
> > > --target=powerpc64-linux --with-cpu
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:12:36AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
> > First, i found that this gcc-3.4 package in experimental wasn't yet
> > built on powerpc, which i did. It did output lot of FAILs in the tests
> > later on, but i am not sure this is worrying or not.
>
> Plea
Sven Luther writes:
> First, i found that this gcc-3.4 package in experimental wasn't yet
> built on powerpc, which i did. It did output lot of FAILs in the tests
> later on, but i am not sure this is worrying or not.
Please have a look at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/ and compare.
> It
11 matches
Mail list logo
