On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 14:14:25 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 03:12:21PM +0200, Dan Horák wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:32:04 +0100
> > "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 08:19:11AM -0400, Jens Petersen wrote:
> > > > > > >Some OCaml spec files do the following:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ExclusiveArch: %{ocaml_arches}
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >This is always incorrect for several reasons:
> > > >
> > > > Is %{ocaml_arches} used for anything?
> > > >
> > > > In case not, maybe better to remove it?
> > >
> > > I've removed it completely. I'm updating the packages which
> > > used this macro.
> > >
> > > (Unfortunately my original email on this subject is stuck in a
> > > moderator queue, so I've attached it here.)
> >
> > But do you still need to bootstrap ocaml on the non-native arches to
> > get the bytecode interpreted one? Or is simply a build? I'm asking
> > because s390x as you could guess :-)
>
> Just a straight build should work. If the build fail(s/ed) on s390x
> can you point me to that, and I'll take a look.
fails on installed but unpackaged files, details were sent in private
mail
> I'd *really* love someone to write a s390x native backend! That would
> complete the set.
yeah, there is quite long list where s390(x) native backends are
missing :-( but from the ppc64le one it doesn't look that complex ...
Dan
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
