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

Re: New ARM elfloader patch



Okay, I give up. I've tried several times to build this package, and each time it's failed, because of something having nothing to do with the package itself. I got some patches together, and after a couple of early mistakes they've built just fine -- and work with -7 too. But at some point, during unpacking or during dh_makeshlibs or anywhere in between, the following happens:

nfs: server not responding, still trying

(I don't have enough disk space on my Netwinder to hold the entire build tree.) I can't seem to get out of this, can't unmount the remote directories, can't kill the processes which are keeping it busy, even have trouble rebooting sometimes.

If I try to "debian/rules build" after it fails in the middle, it seems to do a "make clean" or something similar which removes all of the previously-built libraries and object files. So the previous progress is lost.

So, could someone else please take my patches and build and upload X for us? They're at:

http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/debs/311_arm_compiler_h.diff
http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/debs/312_arm_elfloader.diff
http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/debs/350_mips_compiler_h.diff
http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/debs/400_hppa_support.diff

Unpack the X source, then put all of these in debian/patches, and remove 310_arm_compiler_h.diff from that directory. It should build, and if all goes well, it may even work!

The first two are based on the previous 310_arm_compiler_h.diff and 600 and 600a from debian/held-patches. No rocket science here, I just had to tweak it a bit to use the inx/outx prototypes from libc, specifically sys/io.h. The last two differ from what's there now only in line numbers so their compiler.h hunks are applied without offset.

Thanks,
--

-Adam P.

GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B  C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6

Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! <http://lyre.mit.edu/%7Epowell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg>





Reply to: