Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-02 Thread Rene Engelhard
On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 11:47:30AM +1200, Michael Cree wrote: > Actually the fix is obvious. Patch attached. Passes test suite and builds > to completion on armel and alpha. Thank you very much. Applied and uploaded. Regards, Rene -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-openoffice-requ...@lists.

Processed: Re: Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags 710336 + patch Bug #710336 [src:graphite2] src:graphite2: FTBFS on sparc and armel: failed tests Added tag(s) patch. -- 710336: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=710336 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --

Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Michael Cree
Control: tags 710336 + patch Actually the fix is obvious. Patch attached. Passes test suite and builds to completion on armel and alpha. Cheers Michael --- graphite2-1.2.1-orig/src/Pass.cpp 2013-02-28 08:32:04.0 +1300 +++ graphite2-1.2.1/src/Pass.cpp 2013-06-02 11:26:52.004522217 +1200

Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Michael Cree
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 08:57:37PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > just noticed I missed a part here: > > 10:29 < suihkulokki> setting it to 5 will make the code SIGBUS where the > unaligned access being made That's brilliant: got it! On ARM v5 running the padauk1 test from the test suite: mjc@

Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Rene Engelhard
Hi, On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 01:22:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > 09:35 < suihkulokki> _rene_: do you have any idea why graphite2 ftbfs's on arm > 09:35 < suihkulokki> _rene_: I take it is due to unaligned access since it's > also failing on sparc? > [...] > 10:07 < _rene_> suihkulokki: was n

Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Rene Engelhard
Hi, On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 11:01:55PM +1200, Michael Cree wrote: > graphite2 also FTBFS on alpha and sparc64 at debian-ports. It appears > to me that the common factor between the build failures (armel,sparc, > sparc64,alpha) is that they are all RISC CPUs requiring strict alignment > on memory

Bug#710336: some observations

2013-06-01 Thread Michael Cree
graphite2 also FTBFS on alpha and sparc64 at debian-ports. It appears to me that the common factor between the build failures (armel,sparc, sparc64,alpha) is that they are all RISC CPUs requiring strict alignment on memory accesses. I would bet on a misaligned memory access somewhere in the code,