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

Re: mpich C++ translation (to the correct list)



On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 11:23:02AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The main thing that we're blocked on at the moment is lam.  lam currently
> FTBFS on m68k due to a gcc 4.0 bug.  I'm going to provide a patch today to
> lower the optimization to -O2 for all architectures, based on debian-devel
> comments that -O3 isn't a good idea on i386 either, and then it probably
> needs an NMU.

Is it the main thing, or the only thing?  We have been ignoring m68k-only
build failures in select cases for testing migration.

> Once the new lam has been uploaded and builds on m68k, the other packages
> that depend on it can get uploaded to build with the new lam (including
> netpipe, which depends on both lam and mpich and hasn't been built for the
> new lam yet).

Can these packages be uploaded with a versioned build-dependency on lam?

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: