Hi, 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 tidbit: * mipsel: the porter machine and some of the buildd machines have an implementation error for one opcode; missing kernel in the archive  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? Thanks, -Steve  https://lists.debian.org/debian-mips/2013/06/msg00048.html
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.