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

trouble on mipsel-buildd mayer?


I recently uploaded Boost 1.54, which initially built fine on mipsel (used the 
buildd eysler).  Five days later, I uploaded again with some small fixes and 
the build failed on mipsel.  It didn't just fail, but it failed spectacularly 
with multiple Internal Compiler Errors -- see #715526.

Later, I read an interesting thread about "DSA Concerns", which included this 

    * mipsel: the porter machine and some of the buildd machines have an
      implementation error for one opcode; missing kernel in the archive [1]

Is this referring to "mayer"?  The ensuing thread contained some references to 
different machine types such as "2e".  Eysler is running kernel "Linux 3.2.0-4-
loongson-2e" while Mayer is running "3.2.0-4-sb1-bcm91250a".  Since the buildd 
for a given build is selected at random, I elected to re-try the build on a 
porterbox, eder.  This one is also a "loongson-2e" and the build succeeded.  

So the evidence I have is that "2e" machines work and "bcm91250a" machines do 
not.  I'm open to suggestions as to #715526: is the ICE truly a compiler bug?  
Is it a bug in the kernel?  Other part of the toolchain?  Is the physical 
hardware flakey?

Can we remove mayer so that packages don't artificially fail to build?


[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-mips/2013/06/msg00048.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: