Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture
От | Tatsuo Ishii |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199906121539.AAA08504@srapc451.sra.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture (Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>At 8:29 AM -0700 6/10/99, Oliver Elphick wrote: >>>This patch should enable 6.5 to build on Motorola 68000 architecture. It >>>comes >>>from Roman Hodek <Roman.Hodek@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>. >> >>Has anyone compared the Linux/m68k patch with the NetBSD/m68k patch (which >>I believe was already included in 6.5)? > >yes. > >>Also I have been trying to cross-post some traffic on the >>port-mac68k@NetBSD.org list to the PG-ports list and it hasn't been >>appearing afaict. Am I just not looking carefully enough or is something >>screwy? > >I have tried 6.4beta4 on NetBSD 1.3.3/m68k. It failed while running >initdb: > >Creating template database in /usr/local/pgsql/data/base/template1 > >FATAL: s_lock(001bbea3) at bufmgr.c:1992, stuck spinlock. Aborting. > >FATAL: s_lock(001bbea3) at bufmgr.c:1992, stuck spinlock. Aborting. > >Seems something really bad is going on... I reverted back the patch for include/storage/s_lock.h and seems NetBSD/m68k port begins to work again. I think we should revert back the linux/m68k patches and leave them for 6.5.1. Objection? -- Tatsuo Ishii
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: