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

Bug#1022175: marked as done (tup: FTBFS on riscv64)

Your message dated Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:10:47 +0000
with message-id <E1pMv5j-002up5-Ex@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#1022175: fixed in tup 0.7.11-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #1022175,
regarding tup: FTBFS on riscv64
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1022175: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1022175
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---

Source: tup

Version: 0.7.11-1

Tags: normal

Tags: ftbfs, patch

User: debian-riscv@lists.debian.org
Usertags: riscv64
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-riscv@lists.debian.org

 

 

Hi,

 

Currently, there is a FTBFS issue on riscv64 architecture. This is due to lack of the architecture support in the source file:

 

../src/tup/platform.c:62:2: error: #error Unsupported cpu architecture. Please add support in tup/platform.c

 

The full FTBFS buildd log can be found here:

https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=tup&arch=riscv64&ver=0.7.11-1&stamp=1647043572&raw=0

 

There is a merged upstream patch [1] that fixes this issue for riscv64. I managed to build it successfully on my native riscv64 board with the patch.

I had cherry-picked the specific patch and submitted a Merge Request on Salsa:

 

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/tup/-/merge_requests/1

 

Please let me know if there are any issues/help needed. Thanks!

 

Best Regards,

Jun Yuan

 

[1]: https://github.com/gittup/tup/commit/2bb112495785922c83ca6401e11ca53f87807d96


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: tup
Source-Version: 0.7.11-3
Done: Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
tup, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 1022175@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com> (supplier of updated tup package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 22:50:35 +0800
Source: tup
Architecture: source
Version: 0.7.11-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org>
Changed-By: Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>
Closes: 1022175
Changes:
 tup (0.7.11-3) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * QA upload.
   * Fix ftbfs on riscv64. (Closes: #1022175)
Checksums-Sha1:
 9a1d6e7b38824814e5940f7a6eb44d30acbaa5cf 2029 tup_0.7.11-3.dsc
 fe5e88d1173317d8ec496d176ac5e54e0e376bc3 9628 tup_0.7.11-3.debian.tar.xz
 81cc22db15dbd2b1357b1936b26aa513607613ab 5805 tup_0.7.11-3_source.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 118187a30d67e795391836744b58efd96768a78ebc442084f3b6bc94b78cdfbb 2029 tup_0.7.11-3.dsc
 95f56f07067d9429255e63cb79f455f6e667845fd0d915801ab231a79801784d 9628 tup_0.7.11-3.debian.tar.xz
 fb957fca4d0c10e26e231094d6a27802cb87c4858cfb5a744b19e1904f9e7a6e 5805 tup_0.7.11-3_source.buildinfo
Files:
 bc7c6f8aa13b9274efb4702795d672fb 2029 devel optional tup_0.7.11-3.dsc
 bece36878e75a87f8ad012f9d9331763 9628 devel optional tup_0.7.11-3.debian.tar.xz
 5366a8d8b1f4f447687da2af0bedf8f2 5805 devel optional tup_0.7.11-3_source.buildinfo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=00bq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: