Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 09 Oct 2022 21:06:30 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        haskell@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 264192] lang/ghc: poudriere based build used odd mix of devel/llvm10 and system toolchain
Message-ID:  <bug-264192-16154-X7FFh0Phmr@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-264192-16154@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-264192-16154@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D264192

--- Comment #56 from Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> ---
(In reply to Mikael Urankar from comment #31)

Just a summary note about the status of my armv7 experiments, and that I'm
going to stop attempting them. I'll not even be tracking the armv7 or
aarch64 status any more.

> Yes, the haddock is only a problem in aarch64 / armv7 context (it works
> fine on a armv7 board)

But not on other armv7 boards, in my context: The Orange Pi Plus 2E does
not manage to build it, failing well before haddock is the issue. (Other,
earlier comments have some details.)

So far as I know, no one has managed to isolate specific criteria for
what it takes to allow builds to work on armv7 --or for armv7 via an=20
aarch64 that can execute armv7 code. (Likely a similar point goes for
"on armv6".) Possibly it is just the process size limit and memory
usage both being sufficiently large. But no one has indicated a pair
of figures that are known to work if the armv7 context allows the
sizes. I do not have a context that can explore that: too limited for
the process size at least.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-264192-16154-X7FFh0Phmr>