#ubuntu-toolchain 2006-02-21
<jbailey> https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/evolution is telling me I don't have access to this page.
<jbailey> Bah, ECHAN
<jbailey> Applied.  But with the changes I checked in before all archs but x86 and
<jbailey> x86-64 are broken again.  Somebody needs to write the generic
<jbailey> lowlevelrobustlock.c file and adjust the lowlevellock.h files.
<jbailey> .
<jbailey> I wonder if Roland was being overoptimistic when he said that 2.4 would be out by April...
#ubuntu-toolchain 2006-02-26
<tepsipakki> lamont: ping
<tepsipakki> lamont: I mailed you
* lamont reads https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/29187
<lamont>  and giggles
<lamont> hrm.. wrong channel
#ubuntu-toolchain 2008-02-18
<\sh> doko: hi :) something weired is happening in wine country...and it looks like that something changed in between wine 0.9.54 and 0.9.55, there was a gcc upload from 4.2.2.2 to 4.2.2.3 was something elementary changed in this release ? looks like that something is going wrong in the wine-preloader thing
#ubuntu-toolchain 2008-02-20
<infinity> doko: Around?
<doko> infinity: yes
<infinity> doko: When we demoted gcc-3.3 to universe, we ended up with broken/mismatched overrides, since libgcc1/hppa still comes from gcc-3.3
<infinity> doko: Suggestions?  Drop libgcc1/hppa from gcc-3.3 entirely, build it from a newer gcc, promote gcc-3.3 back to main?
<doko> infinity: it should not be needed anymore. packages depending on it should be rebuilt
<infinity> Nothing depends on it, I checked that.
<infinity> So, you'd opt for "drop it completely"?
<doko> hmm, that would mean to remove gcc-3.3 for hppa from universe
<infinity> I can't imagine anyone complaining...
<doko> sure, but I'd like to avoid a new upload to just disable it
<infinity> I take it that building libgcc4 and libgcc1 from gcc-4.2 is a technical impossibility?
<doko> yes
<infinity> Figured.
<infinity> Anyhow, override mismatches cause DAK to explode, so we need to do something to fix this.
<doko> but then you should remove 3.4 and 4.0 as well (but maybe too much fortran stuff still depends on it=
<doko> so just remove it, and don't upload 3.3 again?
<infinity> Heh.
<infinity> Removing it will probably just cause a new build to happen on hppa.
<infinity> (I could P-a-s it out, but I'm not sure Debian would be keen on that change..)
<doko> well, try to upload a new version, which fails for hppa
<doko> but it should still work for the other archs. maybe upload to the ubuntu-toolchain ppa first?
<infinity> I imagine it would fail on hppa quite convincingly if I just removed the libgcc1 stanzas from control...
<infinity> Alternately, I could change every single arch:any binary to arch:i386,amd64,powerpc,sparc,lpia,ia64 ...
<infinity> *shudder*
<doko> well, just let the build fail
<doko> I think there's something like this for alpha
<infinity> pre-build:
<infinity> #ifeq (,$(filter $(DEB_TARGET_ARCH), $(build_only_archs)))
<infinity> #       @echo "The package is not built anymore for $(DEB_TARGET_ARCH)"
<infinity> #       @exit 42
<infinity> #endif
<infinity> That stuff?
<infinity> I can just replace that with "ifeq ($(DEB_TARGET_ARCH),hppa)" and uncomment it.
<infinity> doko: http://people.ubuntu.com/~adconrad/gcc-3.3.diff
<infinity> doko: Look good?
<infinity> lamont: Any complaints about the above?
 * lamont looks
<infinity> lamont: I would just P-a-s it out of hppa, but Debian might not like that (and we don't maintain our own P-a-s, for sanity's sake...)
<lamont> rigth
<lamont> +1
<doko> yes
<infinity> Kay, that's two +1s, uploading.  Thanks.
<infinity> doko: Hahaha.  I didn't even have to change the package at all, oh well. ;)
<infinity> doko: gcc-3.3 build-depends on itself, so removing it from the archive was enough to permanently break it.
#ubuntu-toolchain 2008-02-21
<doko_> infinity: well, it was just moved to universe, wasn't it?
