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

Bug#728053: Updated debdiff for mesa to compile on m68k



Hi all,

updated debdiff attached. Package compiles fine with it
(on i386 and m68k), and the invalid alignment assumptions
were made explicit with no ABI breakage.
Please apply.

Thanks,
//mirabilos
-- 
15:41⎜<Lo-lan-do:#fusionforge> Somebody write a testsuite for helloworld :-)
diff -u mesa-10.2.3/debian/changelog mesa-10.2.3/debian/changelog
--- mesa-10.2.3/debian/changelog
+++ mesa-10.2.3/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+mesa (10.2.3-1+m68k.1) unreleased; urgency=low
+
+  * Fix struct alignment assumptions. (Closes: #728053)
+
+ -- Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de>  Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:50:57 +0200
+
 mesa (10.2.3-1) unstable; urgency=low
 
   [ Maarten Lankhorst ]
diff -u mesa-10.2.3/debian/patches/series mesa-10.2.3/debian/patches/series
--- mesa-10.2.3/debian/patches/series
+++ mesa-10.2.3/debian/patches/series
@@ -1,0 +2 @@
+08_gallium-fix-build-failure-on-m68k.diff
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- mesa-10.2.3.orig/debian/patches/08_gallium-fix-build-failure-on-m68k.diff
+++ mesa-10.2.3/debian/patches/08_gallium-fix-build-failure-on-m68k.diff
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+From: Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org
+Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 18:04:07 +0100
+Subject: Fix FTBFS on m68k due to invalid struct alignment assumptions
+Debian-Bug: #728053
+
+Make alignment assumptions explicit by inserting correct padding,
+as upstream already did for other parts of the structure.
+
+--- a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nv50/nv84_video_bsp.c
++++ b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nv50/nv84_video_bsp.c
+@@ -67,10 +67,15 @@ struct iparm {
+          uint32_t field_is_ref; // 04 // bit0: top, bit1: bottom
+          uint8_t is_long_term; // 08
+          uint8_t non_existing; // 09
++         uint8_t u0a; // 0a
++         uint8_t u0b; // 0b
+          uint32_t frame_idx; // 0c
+          uint32_t field_order_cnt[2]; // 10
+          uint32_t mvidx; // 18
+          uint8_t field_pic_flag; // 1c
++         uint8_t u1d; // 1d
++         uint8_t u1e; // 1e
++         uint8_t u1f; // 1f
+          // 20
+       } refs[0x10]; // 1e0
+    } ipicparm; // 150

Reply to: