Re: failed sparc/powerpc build of libidn 1.22-1
Hi,
The java code in libidn fails to build using GCJ on Sparc and PowerPC.
Complete link to log quoted below, but the relevant part is shown
inline. Any ideas? It seems like the gcj compiler is broken on these
architectures.
/Simon
make[6]: Entering directory `/build/buildd-libidn_1.22-1-sparc-O07rsn/libidn-1.22/java/gnu/inet/encoding'
CLASSPATH=../../../../java:./../../../../java:$CLASSPATH javac -d ../../../../java CombiningClass.java Composition.java DecompositionKeys.java DecompositionMappings.java IDNA.java IDNAException.java NFKC.java Punycode.java PunycodeException.java RFC3454.java Stringprep.java StringprepException.java
/usr/lib/sparc-linux-gnu/gcc/sparc-linux-gnu/4.4.6/ecj1: error while loading shared libraries: libgcj_bc.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
make[6]: *** [classdist_noinst.stamp] Error 1
Debian buildds <noreply@buildd.debian.org> writes:
> * Source package: libidn
> * Version: 1.22-1
> * Architecture: sparc
> * State: failed
> * Suite: sid
> * Builder: lebrun.debian.org
> * Build log:
> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=libidn&arch=sparc&ver=1.22-1&stamp=1308563014&file=log
>
> Please note that these notifications do not necessarily mean bug reports
> in your package but could also be caused by other packages, temporary
> uninstallabilities and arch-specific breakages. A look at the build log
> despite this disclaimer would be appreciated however.
Debian buildds <noreply@buildd.debian.org> writes:
> * Source package: libidn
> * Version: 1.22-1
> * Architecture: powerpc
> * State: failed
> * Suite: sid
> * Builder: poulenc.debian.org
> * Build log:
> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=libidn&arch=powerpc&ver=1.22-1&stamp=1308562221&file=log
>
> Please note that these notifications do not necessarily mean bug reports
> in your package but could also be caused by other packages, temporary
> uninstallabilities and arch-specific breakages. A look at the build log
> despite this disclaimer would be appreciated however.
Reply to: