search for: porterbox

Hi, is there a DD-accessible porterbox somewhere (slow would be ok, as this is smallish software) with an up-to-date sid (enough to install the recently-built libklibc-dev 2.0~rc5-1 and all other B-D of mksh 40.9.20120518-1, as well as strace and gdb-minimal)? Similarily to http://www.zytor.com/pipermail/klibc/2012-May/003229.html I fo...

...gt; ask DD to approve it. Are you a DD, or Sylvestre is? >> I am (cf my email address). >> Why would like to do in this context ? > > Well, not everyone has a ARM machine to help ARM testing. That's why > Mehmet mentioned Debian has resource. Sorry but the goal of Debian porterboxes is not for upstream testing their software but for packaging purposes. You should instead have a look to the GCC compilation farm: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm Some LLVM developers are using these servers for testing LLVM and Dragonegg. Sylvestre

...mu-system-arm 2.0 as currently available through Debian/unstable doesn't want to tell us anything about available devices unless we specify a machine type. The patch below works around that issue, but I haven't been able to run qemu-system-arm with a supermin appliance on Debian's armhf porterbox so far: 100% CPU usage, no output from the kernel. For armel, there's no kernel with device tree blobs, so I think that I'll need to use linux-image-versatile there or ignore armel altogether. powerpc: qemu-system-ppc does not know about the "pseries" machine, I have figured out...

Hi sh4 porters, I?ve just fixed a regression of klibc to build from source on sh4 using the sumotsu.debian.net porterbox (thanks for making one available) and found a problem with your archi- tecture: all binaries built with klibc (shared and static) get a SIGILL (illegal instruction). I suspect that different CFLAGS are needed. Please, someone, have a look at it; a release of klibc 2.0 upstream is imminent. bye, /...

On 24 April 2013 12:01, Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre at debian.org> wrote: > Sorry but the goal of Debian porterboxes is not for upstream testing > their software but for packaging purposes. > > You should instead have a look to the GCC compilation farm: > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm > Some LLVM developers are using these servers for testing LLVM and > Dragonegg. > Hi Folks, I'...

...nocheck). Please, please build and test these klibc and mksh versions on as new a sid environment as you can get (I could probably ask for access to an hppa lenny chroot, but? ugh!) and see whether it?ll work for you ? klibc on sh4, for example, was broken and nobody noticed it until I ssh?d to a porterbox (there seem to not exist any for hppa and powerpcspe) to fix an FTBFS, wanted to test the result and saw SIGILL (then downloaded the last version that had built, ran it and saw a SIGILL, so _that_ was no regression). A klibc 2.0 release is imminent, so please have a look. I?d also be interested in...

On 24/04/2013 12:21, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) wrote: > Hi Mehmet, > > Thanks for the info. I just contacted DSA (Debian System Admin, I > guess), and he said we have to prepare information list on [1] and > ask DD to approve it. Are you a DD, or Sylvestre is? I am (cf my email address). Why would like to do in this context ? Thanks, Sylvestre

Hi Sylvestre, > > Thanks for the info. I just contacted DSA (Debian System Admin, I > > guess), and he said we have to prepare information list on [1] and > > ask DD to approve it. Are you a DD, or Sylvestre is? > I am (cf my email address). > Why would like to do in this context ? Well, not everyone has a ARM machine to help ARM testing. That's why Mehmet

...pr 29 15:43:20 2014 +0100 builder: Fix parallel builds of index-parse.o. there is a small chance that a build may go wrong with the described symtom, missing "do_parse" symbol. It just happened to me on Debian's ppc64el buildd[1] and I could not reproduce the issue on a ppc64el porterbox -- the whole build worked just fine. Cheers, -Hilko [1] <https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libguestfs&arch=ppc64el&ver=1%3A1.36.6-3&stamp=1506377176&raw=0>

Hi Renato, > > Sorry but the goal of Debian porterboxes is not for upstream testing > > their software but for packaging purposes. > > > > You should instead have a look to the GCC compilation farm: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm > > Some LLVM developers are using these servers for testing LLVM and > > Drag...

Le mardi 27 mars 2012 à 14:36 -0700, Bill Wendling a écrit : > IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! > [...] > By the way, we are looking for ARM testers. There was a lot of interest in the 3.0 release for an ARM release. We will try to do one this release on a trial basis. We are looking for ARMv7 cortex-a8 and cortex-a9 on Linux. If you are interested, I can upload the current trunk

IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! We will be branching for the 3.1 release on April 16th! :-) This gives us a little over two weeks to get the trees into the most stable condition we can. What this means for you: All major features for the 3.1 release should be finished or near completion by the April 16th. After April 16th, we will accept only bug fixes and patches which do not change the