[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mono_1.1.18-3 (arm/unstable): FTBFS: SIGSEGV

On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 01:57:48PM +0000, Wookey wrote:
> > So where does that leave us for etch?  Does a mono that doesn't run on
> > netwinders and apparently not on smackdown either, but does run on other
> > cats systems, make the grade for release?  If no one has time to investigate
> > the problem on netwinder, that at least suggests to me that netwinder isn't
> > that important a use case for the porters and probably not the users either.

> > Does the "TLS emulation" diagnosis imply a bug elsewhere in the kernel or
> > glibc rather than in mono?

> > Anyway, our three real choices here are:

> > - mono support on netwinder is not RC in the porters' estimation, so the bug
> >   can be downgraded or etch-ignored
> > - mono support on netwinder is RC in the porters' estimation, but no one has
> >   time to work on this problem, so the arm binaries should be removed from
> >   the archive for the release
> > - mono support on netwinder is RC in the porters' estimation, and there is a
> >   porter with the know-how and time to fix this bug who is volunteering to
> >   have me nag them once every other day until it's fixed ;)

> > If we are still missing information for the porters to decide whether this
> > should be RC, what can I do to help get that information?

> OK. I don't have a netwinder to test on (tbm took mine), and probably
> don't have sufficient expertise either. This failure is extremely
> odd. I think we should etch-ignore this bug, it's not ideal, but
> no-one is rushing forward to fix it, and netwinders will become less
> important during this release. Their use as buildds is the main reason
> it's a problem in practice - can we arrange to only have this built on
> the non-netwinder machines? 

Yes, getting the package built on non-netwinders should not be a problem --
and the autobuilder for stable is a cats box.  I agree that if the problem
is specific to netwinder, there's probably no sense in treating this as

But does anyone understand yet *why* this bug affects the netwinders and not
the cats boxes?

> Removing mono from arm for this release entirely seems worse than
> having a version which does work on some(?)/most(?) hardware.

My biggest worry is that this is not a hardware issue at all but a kernel
issue, and we'll be bitten post-release when the kernels on the autobuilders
are changed.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Reply to: