[06:16] morning [06:50] Fabio! [06:51] hey jbailey [06:51] jbailey: apparently the kernel errors on sparc (2.6.12) is something to do with the toolchain [06:51] Joy [06:51] jbailey: in debian the same kernel (or almost) builds fine [06:51] so i am building now in a hoary chroot to see [06:52] Both using gcc-3.4? [06:52] Or just using the usual default? [06:52] both using gcc-3.4 [06:52] Odd [06:52] It shouldn't be any of the glibc bits that I've done. [06:52] oh you mean in debian? [06:52] debian was the default [06:52] So from 3.3 to 3.4 [06:52] for hoary/breezy i am using gcc-3.4 [06:52] but [06:52] i did try in breezy with gcc-3.3 [06:53] same results [06:53] Hmm, I won't have much time to help you this week. [06:53] don't worry [06:53] I forgot that gcc summit was this week, so I'll be away a good chunk of the week. [06:53] i am only trying to figure out what is causing the breakage [06:53] But I'll have my laptop. [06:54] once we know what does it, we will have a better idea of what to hunt down [06:54] right now there are too many vars in place [07:27] infinity: i think i have almost done with ghc6 :) [07:32] oh crap [07:32] battle star concordia is down [07:46] doko: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=309317 [08:46] jbailey: confirmed.. kernel on sparc is a toolchain problem. i am going to update one bit at a time to see what make it fail === chmj [~d3vic3@dumbledore.hbd.com] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === ajmitch [~ajmitch@port163-214.ubs.maxnet.co.nz] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain [10:37] fabbione: ocaml: we have to try it again with 3.4 again, when the X headers are in place [10:37] ok [10:38] doko: i was only reporting svenl "let's bitch fabbione for doko's stuff" rant on #d-kernel [11:01] oh fun [11:02] jbailey: you are not going to like this... the kernel link failures happen with the new glibc :) [11:02] jbailey: clean hoary -> kernel ok [11:02] jbailey: hoary + breezy glibc -> failure [11:02] jbailey: please fix libc6. kthxbye [11:02] (oh btw.. it does the same with or without NTPL [11:02] ) === Seveas [~seveas@seveas.demon.nl] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === zul [~chuck@CPE0006258ec6c2-CM000a73655d0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === karlheg [~karlheg@host-250-237.resnet.pdx.edu] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain [01:13] fabbione: Joy. I need more details. Like why is your kernel linking with glibc? =) [01:14] jbailey: pleasure :) [01:14] jbailey: I guess makedepend and such is linking with glibc? [01:14] probably all the tools are.... [01:15] Mithrandir: could you have a look at updating amd64-libs to be able to build the biarch compiler again? [01:15] doko: don't even think about uploading gcc-4 [01:15] fabbione: no, 3.4 first ;) [01:15] or i am going to send you a dead horse :) [01:15] doko: could you get jbailey to do it? He's, afaik, working on some stuff for glibc to make it go away. [01:15] 3.3 and 3.4 are ok [01:15] 4.0 is insane to build [01:16] Mithrandir: promised, I'll pester him ;) [01:18] doko: I still need your help on that to get the includedir working right. [01:19] The problem is still that glibc doesn't consider i386 and amd64 biarch to one another, so I need to be able to have different headers looked at for -m32 and -m64 [01:20] I think Tollef's multiarch patch for just the cppFOO.c file [01:20] (looking up the actual file name) [01:20] ahh, ok [01:21] cppdefault.c [01:22] so let's experiment with 3.4 first, and break the kernel builds [01:22] jbailey: actually not, it doesn't look at switches, it just adds to the list of include files, IIRC. [01:22] jbailey: but with a nice set of #ifdef __i386__ and __amd64__ it could work fine. [01:23] I'm not really interested in screwing with the glibc headers in ways that they won't accept for the 2.3 branch if I can avoid it. [01:23] Since the goal is to have the multiarch patch in anyway.... [01:23] Basically, I think I just need to move bits/ and the kernel headers into the multiarch include directories, and I should be fine. [01:30] Right, no need for that. Was trying to get xchat to open a separate channel for us, but there isn't really any need. [01:31] I've looked over initramfs-tools and am making some changes. [01:31] karlheg: #ubuntu-kernel is a better choice. =) [01:31] I have it (untested) able to support module arguements, so far, and now I'm looking at hook scripts that run when mkinitramfs is run. [01:32] Ok. === \sh [~shermann@server3.servereyes.de] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === doko [~doko___@dsl-084-059-069-224.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === lamont [~lamont@15.238.5.145] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain [04:22] lamont: I'll be in a car with Carlos for 7 hours tomorrow. I imagine hppa hacking will come up at some point. Anything in particular you want covered? =) [04:23] hrm... lets see. Fixing the current 4.0 ICE's would be cool. [04:24] working TLS would be cool === lamont will ponder other things to have you beat him with [04:49] oh, and (of course) getting a gcc-4.0 with the optimizer regression fixed. [04:49] And of course to finish his NM. =) === Seveas [~seveas@seveas.demon.nl] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain [05:20] concordia is back, for those who care [05:34] elmo: Tx. === svenl [~luther@AStrasbourg-251-1-7-191.w82-126.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === cfan [~deepan@203.212.229.87] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain === cfan [~deepan@203.212.229.87] has left #ubuntu-toolchain [] === jbailey [~jbailey@CPE00501836c657-CM014260028338.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ubuntu-toolchain [10:49] gcj: : No such file or directory [10:49] make[5] : *** [gnu/java/security/x509/ext/IssuerAlternativeNames.lo] Error 1 [10:49] doko: is that expected for -9ubuntu1? [10:50] hmm, interesting ... [10:52] that's about 4.5 hours into the build, -9ubuntu2 is 2.5 hours into its build [10:55] that won't change [10:57] lamont: hppa? [10:59] yes [10:59] fix it ;) === lamont installs gcj into the chroot [11:00] (missing build-dep?) [11:01] build-depends on gcj, but does not declare such a build-dep. [11:02] doko: fix that. kthxbye === lamont isn't sure which of the build-deps _should_ be bringing that in, but it probably relates to hppa not having java at all until 4.0, yes? [11:03] heh, hppa does have java starting with 3.3 :-) [11:03] well, okj [11:04] hrm.. not in ubuntu main, though. :-) [11:04] anyrate, it runs the gcj command, which winds up being 4.0 these days. [11:12] ehh, it doesn't run gcj from the build tree?