Re: Please reenable GCJ on mips
Nathanael Nerode writes:
> Nathanael Nerode writes:
> > This is no way to get a bug fixed. If this is seriously the level of
> > attention to mips and mipsel, Debian support for them should be dropped.
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> >sorry, this attitude has nothing to do with release management, it's
> >just ranting.
> >The problem is addressed, known to the right people.
> Sure doesn't look like it; at the very least, there's a failure of openness in
> the processes here. This really is no way to get a bug fixed. The failure
> to report the bug upstream was what really got to me.
> >Just ask if you cannot find some information.
> All right.
> * What's wrong with ld on mips/mipsel?
> * What's the last time a gcj build was tested on mips/mipsel, what version of
> ld was it tested with, and where are the results?
current gcc-4.0 and gcc-snapshot packages, using current binutils packages.
> * Why isn't the problem reported upstream to binutils? I know it's not, since
> I checked.
AFAIK it's not just a binutils problem.
> * If it's Debian-specific, has it been tracked to a particular part of
> Debian's configuration of binutils? If not, which mips porter is working on
it's not Debian specific.
> And for pkg-java-maintainers:
> * Why was kaffe deliberately broken on mips and mipsel?
> * If this was being done with the intention of removing kaffe on those
> architectures, why isn't there a bug against ftp.debian.org requesting the
> removal of the obsolete binaries? For mipsel, at least, this is still
> Nathanael Nerode <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> This space intentionally left blank.