From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 87797 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2019 17:46:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 87786 invoked by uid 89); 9 Nov 2019 17:46:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=U*doko, dokoubuntucom, doko@ubuntu.com, H*c:alternative X-HELO: mail-lj1-f173.google.com Received: from mail-lj1-f173.google.com (HELO mail-lj1-f173.google.com) (209.85.208.173) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 17:46:31 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-f173.google.com with SMTP id q2so9512634ljg.7 for ; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 09:46:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=moxielogic-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kboKpifGSotsyxf0mIsNxoatilR6z4ySNc4Zn40peQQ=; b=GjT+rFjOXAip/6s9YCRhypOG81xLTrtPFr+3T18hNsGk3HYt7GcDWhRI1CW4mvABof fQz1AIfk6SXsmtOO/HwYlQrdDX2bxk4FqaUcFzMqKdiC4xr4CBc3OgAA4Dwwx0U48bPM 2LeqcgE7CeR/Gb9SXDtYCG9Q2ApNZCfo1Xs9zyHVvIxom4dNHmlRlTYGIQNahXGtHAzm n8BseikVvZoyL0mDM+lnA+bTD32onqSu/8ZRsc4Koiz0yVPieally7PP4bB4rP28pmQV Nlb/DZk1cpjwt/xCrHUV3QeeeikRikbALGGUGTDVsBmxzreUYEu5H1ViP41NfQK6fVkQ iNiQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <288adc9e-ad74-7813-eed8-e94dcb4e185f@ubuntu.com> In-Reply-To: <288adc9e-ad74-7813-eed8-e94dcb4e185f@ubuntu.com> From: Anthony Green Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2019 17:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: libffi 3.3 release candidate 1 To: Matthias Klose Cc: libffi-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019/txt/msg00059.txt.bz2 On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 11:04 AM Matthias Klose wrote: > > The arm64 failures are mysterious runtime failures. The libffi test > > results for arm64 are good, so I'm wondering if the debian package adds > any > > patches. > > no patches. > I tested g-wrap (upstream) on arm64, and am not able to reproduce the problem. "make check" worked fine with the new libffi. > The jffi failures all look like this: > > > > [exec] make[2]: *** No rule to make target '-L/usr/lib/../lib', > > needed by '/<>/build/jni/jffi/LongDouble.o'. Stop. > > > > Perhaps this has something to do with how libffi is installed now? > > Regardless, it's probably easy to fix whatever it is. > > libffi has in the pkg-config file: Libs: -L/usr/lib/../lib > Normally pkg-config filters out system directories, but apparently fails > for > noncanonical paths. And jffi only expects libs. So something packagers > should > catch, unless you want to remove all the multilib build support, but I'm > still > awaiting your libffi merge for GCC 10 ;) > This may never happen. libffi should probably just come out of GCC, and go can depend on the system libffi. > > The arm64 failures seem like a blocker for the release, which I'm still > > hoping to get out on Nov 12. > > haskell-stack haskell-termonad are the remaining regressions, but I'm not > sure > if they are related at all. > They don't look like libffi issues to me. AG