[opensuse-factory] i586 vs. aarch64
Hi, How important is i586 from the Factory/Tumbleweed submission point of view? I got a bug report for syslog-ng on Aarch64 in Tumbleweed. It seems, that a simple version upgrade resolved the problem: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3 On the other hand there is a bug in bison (https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3), so syslog-ng does not build on i586 right now. Can I still submit syslog-ng 3.22.1 to Factory, knowing that due to that bison bug it does not build on i586 right now? Bye, CzP -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi,
-----Original Message----- From: Peter Czanik <peter@czanik.hu> Sent: 12 August 2019 10:48 To: opensuse-factory <opensuse-factory@opensuse.org> Subject: [opensuse-factory] i586 vs. aarch64
Hi,
How important is i586 from the Factory/Tumbleweed submission point of view? I got a bug report for syslog-ng on Aarch64 in Tumbleweed. It seems, that a simple version upgrade resolved the problem: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3
On the other hand there is a bug in bison (https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3), so syslog-ng does not build on i586 right now.
Can I still submit syslog-ng 3.22.1 to Factory, knowing that due to that bison bug it does not build on i586 right now?
I would say that i586 is legacy and aarch64 is more important, but my opinion may be a bit biased. ;) I would say you should submit it and see what happens. Cheers, Guillaume
Bye,
CzP
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
On 8/12/19 6:17 PM, Peter Czanik wrote:
Hi,
How important is i586 from the Factory/Tumbleweed submission point of view? I got a bug report for syslog-ng on Aarch64 in Tumbleweed. It seems, that a simple version upgrade resolved the problem: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3
On the other hand there is a bug in bison (https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3), so syslog-ng does not build on i586 right now.
Can I still submit syslog-ng 3.22.1 to Factory, knowing that due to that bison bug it does not build on i586 right now?
I am pretty sure there are other packages that no longer build for i586 chromium being one, but make sure you put "ExcludeArch:" in the spec file so that it doesn't attempt to build and fail as that will block the submission. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Aug 15, 2019, at 1:59 AM, Simon Lees <sflees@suse.de> wrote:
I am pretty sure there are other packages that no longer build for i586 chromium being one, but make sure you put "ExcludeArch:" in the spec file so that it doesn't attempt to build and fail as that will block the submission.
I have a hard time believing that bison is actually broken on i586. And if it is, it should be fixed for the sake that there might be a more generic bug behind it. Unless a package has special architecture requirements, it should build on all architectures otherwise there is a hidden bug somewhere. Adrian-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 15/08/2019 02:23, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Aug 15, 2019, at 1:59 AM, Simon Lees <sflees@suse.de> wrote:
I am pretty sure there are other packages that no longer build for i586 chromium being one, but make sure you put "ExcludeArch:" in the spec file so that it doesn't attempt to build and fail as that will block the submission. I have a hard time believing that bison is actually broken on i586. And if it is, it should be fixed for the sake that there might be a more generic bug behind it.
Unless a package has special architecture requirements, it should build on all architectures otherwise there is a hidden bug somewhere.
Hi, Here is the bug report sent upstream: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2019-08/msg00002.html As far as I could understand (I do not code in C or use bison), the problem is not architecture specific. It's just a coincidence, that the problem manifests on i586. Bye, CzP -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8/15/19 7:48 AM, Peter Czanik wrote:
Here is the bug report sent upstream: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2019-08/msg00002.html
As far as I could understand (I do not code in C or use bison), the problem is not architecture specific. It's just a coincidence, that the problem manifests on i586.
Okay, but then the bug _should_ actually be fixed. If you're just using "ExcludeArch", you're sweeping the bug under the carpet meaning it can come back on other architectures which is what I was talking about in my initial mail in this thread. In Debian, the bug doesn't seem to be known [1]. Maybe it manifests in certain build environments only. Adrian
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?repeatmerged=no&src=bison
On 15/08/2019 10:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 8/15/19 7:48 AM, Peter Czanik wrote:
Here is the bug report sent upstream: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2019-08/msg00002.html
As far as I could understand (I do not code in C or use bison), the problem is not architecture specific. It's just a coincidence, that the problem manifests on i586. Okay, but then the bug _should_ actually be fixed. If you're just using "ExcludeArch", you're sweeping the bug under the carpet meaning it can come back on other architectures which is what I was talking about in my initial mail in this thread.
In Debian, the bug doesn't seem to be known [1]. Maybe it manifests in certain build environments only.
Building syslog-ng on s390 also seems to be affected: https://build.opensuse.org/build/home:czanik:branches:Base:System/openSUSE_F... Should I ExcludeArch that as well for now? And there is a mixed situation on FreeBSD: there is lots of garbage on screen while compiling syslog-ng on FreeBSD 12.0 / AMD64, but it still compiles and works fine. The proposed fix was sent upstream by my colleague who debugged the problem I reported originally against syslog-ng: https://github.com/balabit/syslog-ng/issues/2861#issuecomment-518769524 But I'm not aware of a new bison release containing the fix. Bye, CzP -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 15/08/2019 01:58, Simon Lees wrote:
On 8/12/19 6:17 PM, Peter Czanik wrote:
Hi,
How important is i586 from the Factory/Tumbleweed submission point of view? I got a bug report for syslog-ng on Aarch64 in Tumbleweed. It seems, that a simple version upgrade resolved the problem: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3
On the other hand there is a bug in bison (https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143190#c3), so syslog-ng does not build on i586 right now.
Can I still submit syslog-ng 3.22.1 to Factory, knowing that due to that bison bug it does not build on i586 right now?
I am pretty sure there are other packages that no longer build for i586 chromium being one, but make sure you put "ExcludeArch:" in the spec file so that it doesn't attempt to build and fail as that will block the submission.
Thanks! For now I'll use "ExlueArch:" and once bison is fixed, I'll remove it. Normally syslog-ng builds on just about anything. I even learned about new CPU architectures (like the SH4 in the BMW i3) just by checking where syslog-ng is running :) Bye, CzP -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8/15/19 7:43 AM, Peter Czanik wrote:
Thanks! For now I'll use "ExlueArch:" and once bison is fixed, I'll remove it. Normally syslog-ng builds on just about anything. I even learned about new CPU architectures (like the SH4 in the BMW i3) just by checking where syslog-ng is running :)
We're building packages for sh4 on Debian:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=bison&suite=sid
And syslog-ng builds there as well, of course:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=syslog-ng&arch=sh4
Adrian
participants (4)
-
Guillaume Gardet -
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz -
Peter Czanik -
Simon Lees