On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:43:48AM +0200, Frans van Berckel wrote:
>On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 20:36 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 18:27:37 +0200, Frans van Berckel wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 15:59 +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
>>>>On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:15:23AM +0200, Frans van Berckel wrote:
>>>
>>>>>So I found the installed libedit2_2.11-20080614-3_sparc64 package is
>>>>>only symbolic linking, but does not holds the libedit.so.2.11 it selfs.
>>>>
>>>>Well, try find the build log for the package on sparc64 and see how it
>>>>managed to build a package without error but also without a proper result? :)
>>>
>>>Okay comparing the sparc64 and s390x log files. The source of both are
>>>the same. The first diff I have found.
>>>
>>>*This is what sparc64 does.*
>>>building standard edit library
>>>ranlib libedit.a
>>>all ===> readline
>>>touch build-stamp
>>
>>Looks like a bug in pmake:
>>
>>NOPIC Do not build PIC versions of system libraries, and
>> do not build shared libraries. [set if ${MACHINE_ARCH}
>> is "sparc64", unset otherwise.]
>>
>>That might make sense on NetBSD, it certainly doesn't on Debian.
>
>It's not that clear to me what they exactly do in the bsd.own.mk patch
>for all the different architectures. But this a sparc64-only part.
>
>+# The sparc64 port is incomplete.
>+.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "sparc64"
>+NOPROFILE=1
>+NOPIC=1
>+NOLINT=1
>+.endif
>
>Who is able to write a understanding bug report?
Perhaps Guillem or Aurelien?
Hopefully with a patch. :)
>Thanks,
>
>
>Frans van Berckel
>
>
>--
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>Archive: [🔎] 1314953029.1870.23.camel@deblnxsrv222.lan">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 1314953029.1870.23.camel@deblnxsrv222.lan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature