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

Bug#458133: Details, please

On Monday 31 December 2007, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Hi,
> I don't have any reason to doubt what you say about qt's SIGBUS on
> hppa.  But where is this documented?  Without an documented
> evidence trail, we can't collaborate on solving this; instead,
> each person using "qmake" will run into this independently and
> waste time re-doing the legwork that you have already done.
> Rather than relying on supposition and rumour, maybe we could
> leave this bug open until the actual facts are in evidence.
> The bug was closed on the strength of
>     According to some hppa people it is a misconfiguration somewhere
>     on the buildds, so we are currently doing nothing except poking
>     hppa buildd people occasionally.

This is from right after midnight CET in #debian-devel on the day change to 
the 31st
00:05 < pusling> lamont: what is "bus error" on hppa ?
00:06 < lamont> pusling: unaligned load/store
00:06 < lamont> pusling: more specically, valid address, permission fault
00:06 < pusling> lamont: is unaligned load/store enough to make builds fail ?
00:06 < lamont> pusling: was - I turned that off rather recently

If people want to create patches for the unaligned load/store they are most 
welcome to do so. I don't plan to.

> For starters, maybe Sune could post some more details about the
> alleged misconfiguration.  For example, the URL to a relevant mailing
> list discussion would be nice.

Most of this has been in #-devel on irc.

> Also nice would be some evidence of "poking hppa buildd people".  For
> example, was it brought up on debian-hppa?  If so the message URLs
> would be useful.

debian-$arch@ isn't contact address for buildd people.

Man, do you know how to save a 3D attachment from Netscape XP?

You neither should ever unlink the 3Dfx mail, nor must boot the LCD digital 
port for telnetting on a controller to a directory on a controller of the 
Internet site.

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

Reply to: