Fwd: Bug#328031: erlang: ftbfs [sparc] cp: cannot stat `lib/parsetools/ebin/*.beam'

François-Denis Gonthier neumann@REDACTED
Tue Sep 13 22:32:32 CEST 2005

On 13 September 2005 11:47, François-Denis Gonthier wrote:

My sponsor, Will Newton informed me that he built the same package sparc 
today.  It looks like it was truly a temporary toolchain problem, as 
suggested by Mikael Pettersson.

I think I'll leave that bug alone until a new build attempt.

> On 13 September 2005 05:48, you wrote:
> > This log is line-wrap damaged, but in all cases it's erlc that SIGBUSes.
> > I don't have any Debian boxes, but R10B-7 builds fine for me on
> > a) SPARC/Solaris9, gcc-4.0.1
> > b) x86/Linux (Fedora Core 4), gcc-4.0.1
> > c) PowerPC/OSX 10.3.9, gcc-4.0.1
> > and I've successfully built similar versions on PowerPC/Linux (YDL4).
> If you are interrested in the full logs for each failing platforms you can
> see them at: http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/erlang.html
> > Since the Debian issues occur on multiple architectures, I suspect that
> > Debian's toolchain, i.e., its glibc+binutils+gcc combo, is busted.
> The crash occurs for 3 different reasons out of those 3 platforms.
> The problem on Mipsel and arm look like erlc bugs:
> [...]
> erlc -W   +debug_info -I../include -I../../kernel/include -o../ebin
> beam_lib.erl
> ./beam_lib.erl:685: illegal guard expression
> ./beam_lib.erl:692: illegal guard expression
> [...]
> From the changelogs, I can see that such an error is supposed to be fixed,
> so I don't understand the why of this error.
> I'm not experienced enough with Erlang to interpret the stack for the hppa
> error:
> [...]
> erlc -W   +debug_info -I../include -o../ebin prim_inet.erl
> (no error logger present) error: Error in process <0.1.0> with exit value:
> {badarg,[{erl_prim_loader,check_file_result,3},{init,get_boot,1},
> {init,get_boot,2},{init,do_boot,3}]}
> [...]
> Will Newton suspects that this might be caused by the autobuilding lacking
> hd space.
> I believe hppa is the lowest priority for me right now.
> > Does R10B-6 build OK in the same environment(s)?
> The previous package version is 10.b.5.  I'm annoyed that I skipped 10.b.6.
> I'm limited in my efforts to investigate this because I don't have access
> to a sparc-based computer on which I could compile this on.  So, unless I
> find that this problem was previously reported, I'll leave those errors
> alone wait for the next upstream.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20050913/9797ba92/attachment.bin>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list