• Bug#844258: [pkg-golang-devel] Bug#844258: golang-go: go SIGILL on s390

    From Michael Hudson-Doyle@21:1/5 to Philipp Kern on Wed Dec 21 21:30:01 2016
    XPost: linux.debian.bugs.dist

    --94eb2c07797aca019c054430dcdb
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

    On 21 December 2016 at 12:01, Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org> wrote:

    On 11/13/2016 09:55 PM, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
    Filing this as promised and as previously discussed in #835360 [0]. It seems we're having problem building go packages on s390x when they end
    up on a certain buildd[1]. AIUI the issue boilds down to upstream go community doesn't define their support for s390 as we define the s390x
    port in Debian. ie. they consider certain older s390 hardware
    unsupported which is still part of the defined hardware set of debian s390x. See for example [2].

    I'd suggest simply removing s390x binaries and all reverse dependencies
    of golang on s390x. Also go package maintainers should limit their Architecture: field to only include archs that is actually supportable rather than using eg. 'all' like golang-github-shirou-gopsutil does
    despite including parsing code which only covers linux/x86* (and other archs we don't have in Debian).

    Please note that I'm not really interested in being part of any
    discussion around this bug, so please feel free to leave me
    out of it! Thanks!

    FWIW, we have now two of three builders and the porter box supporting
    the s390x CPU feature set that Go requires.

    I suppose the other way out could be that we decom zemlinsky (which
    won't have a replacement). I know that Aurelien already had some patches
    to Go, but not a complete set.


    Have they talked to the IBM folks about this? I remember some comments
    along the lines of "porting to z10 would be feasible but we don't have any
    real reason to do it". If the Debian issue was raised with them, they might
    be willing to help.

    Nothing will happen in time for stretch, of course.

    Cheers,
    mwh

    --94eb2c07797aca019c054430dcdb
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    <div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On 21 December 2016 at 12:01, Philipp Kern <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:pkern@debian.org" target="_blank">pkern@debian.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
    style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 11/13/2016 09:55 PM, Andreas Henriksson wrote:<br>
    &gt; Filing this as promised and as previously discussed in #835360 [0]. It<br> &gt; seems we&#39;re having problem building go packages on s390x when they end<br>
    &gt; up on a certain buildd[1]. AIUI the issue boilds down to upstream go<br> &gt; community doesn&#39;t define their support for s390 as we define the s390x<br>
    &gt; port in Debian.  ie. they consider certain older s390 hardware<br>
    &gt; unsupported which is still part of the defined hardware set of debian<br> &gt; s390x. See for example [2].<br>
    &gt;<br>
    &gt; I&#39;d suggest simply removing s390x binaries and all reverse dependencies<br>
    &gt; of golang on s390x. Also go package maintainers should limit their<br> &gt; Architecture: field to only include archs that is actually supportable<br> &gt; rather than using eg. &#39;all&#39; like golang-github-shirou-gopsutil does<br>
    &gt; despite including parsing code which only covers linux/x86* (and other<br> &gt; archs we don&#39;t have in Debian).<br>
    &gt;<br>
    &gt; Please note that I&#39;m not really interested in being part of any<br> &gt; discussion around this bug, so please feel free to leave me<br>
    &gt; out of it! Thanks!<br>

    </span>FWIW, we have now two of three builders and the porter box supporting<br>
    the s390x CPU feature set that Go requires.<br>

    I suppose the other way out could be that we decom zemlinsky (which<br> won&#39;t have a replacement). I know that Aurelien already had some patches<br>
    to Go, but not a complete set. </blockquote><div><br></div><div>Have they talked to the IBM folks about this? I remember some comments along the lines of &quot;porting to z10 would be feasible but we don&#39;t have any real reason to do it&quot;. If the
    Debian issue was raised with them, they might be willing to help.</div><div><br></div><div>Nothing will happen in time for stretch, of course.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>mwh</div></div></div></div>

    --94eb2c07797aca019c054430dcdb--

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)