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

Re: needs suggestion on LuaJit's IBM architecture dilemma



>From the buildlogs / testlogs / local tests (ppc64el qemu), it seems that
there is completely no improvement for ppc64el. Simple scripts can still
encounter segmentation faults (e.g., autopkgtest for src:lua-moses).
s390x is newly enabled. I still have not seen enough test log to give
any preliminary conclusion.


On Thu, 2022-06-09 at 16:19 +0200, Frédéric Bonnard wrote:
> Hi Mo, Paul,
> did you see any improvement with luajit2 ?
> I was looking at luakit, which still fails "silently" on ppc64el, a lua
> script generating a .h with no symbols with luajit2, where it does work
> with lua.
> Also I see that the autopkgtest of knot-resolver still fails on
> ppc64el.
> 
> F.
> 
> On Thu, 19 May 2022 22:14:01 -0400 "M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-05-19 at 16:30 +0200, Frédéric Bonnard wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I've followed luajit closely since 2015 on ppc64el as a porter
> > > without enough knowledge to port it, but trying to ease on the
> > > packaging/Debian side (being both IBMer/DD).
> > > That port has been a mixed effort between a code bounty and an IBM
> > > effort (some devs) .
> > > It didn't started well (
> > > https://www.freelists.org/post/luajit/PPC64le-port-status,1 ;)
> > > and it has never grown and be really part of the upstream project
> > > sadly.
> > > 
> > > With the years, I'm even less optimistic as no IBM nor external
> > > developer seem to be working on that. Mike Pall seems to be around
> > > though as you said there's no release (not necessarily a bad sign).
> > > I can ping inside IBM but I'm not sure there will be any positive
> > > feedback.
> > > 
> > > So I'd say we have no choice, i.e. let's drop IBM arches .
> > > What I did a few times for packages depending on libluajit was to use
> > > liblua instead :
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892765
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > F.
> > 
> > Nobody want to spend time on an bottomless hole ...
> > I'll simply remove ppc64el architecture support from src:luajit,
> > and give src:luajit2 (openresty) a try.
> > 


Reply to: