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

Re: Building armel on arm64



On 07/24/2018 08:43 PM, Christoph Biedl wrote:
> Perhaps just babble and FUD: There was (and probably still is) an issue
> in powerpc: In a certain package, upstream's compile options for ppc had
> higher CPU requirements than what Debian uses for that architecture. As
> a result, the buildd (some big IBM POWER box) happily built the package,
> but out there on a G4 the code would crash for SIGILL, same when
> rebuilding on such a hardware.

If there are any packages with such an issue, it would be very helpful
if you could open bug reports with the following headers:

User: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org
Usertags: powerpc
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org

> Now I'm somewhat afraid this might happen again when packages for
> armel/armhf are built on more recent hardware. At the same time, I'd
> like to see continued support for these architectures.

Not really. Unless Matthias Klose makes any changes to the baseline
configuration for gcc, this won't happen. Also, the evolution of
ARMv7 (Debian's armhf) would be ARMv8 and that wouldn't work inside
a 32-bit chroot or KVM environment. So, no, I don't think there is
any risk to run into this problem.

On PowerPC, the issue is usually related to AltiVec or the variations
of 64-Bit PowerPC. There are PowerPC variants by FreeScale that are
64 bit but don't support Altivec, for example. But again, if there
is any package which is affected by this problem, please let us know.

Oh, and in case of FPU instructions, you should make sure your kernel
has math emulation ebaled.

> If this is a concern, how to solve it? Have some native non-DSA
> armel/armhf boxes where volunteers rebuild the archive and hope test
> suites will catch such issues?

It's not a concern on ARM32 for the aforementioned reasons.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


Reply to: