From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Mupen64Plus Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:15:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87r3jvw5w2.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8737woawim.fsf@T420.taylan> <878u6bxegy.fsf@T420.taylan> <20151112144929.7732ef85@debian-netbook> <8737wbtgz7.fsf@T420.taylan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49290) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwuXO-0004Vd-Rz for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:15:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwuXI-0001XV-Kr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:15:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8737wbtgz7.fsf@T420.taylan> ("Taylan Ulrich \=\?utf-8\?Q\?\=5C\=22Bay\=C4\=B1rl\=C4\=B1\=2FKammer\=5C\=22\=22's\?\= message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2015 15:44:28 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: taylanbayirli@gmail.com Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer") skribis: > Efraim Flashner writes: > >> On hydra Mupen64plus-core fails to build on arm and mips. >> >> Mips failure message: >> starting phase `build' >> Makefile:127: *** CPU type "mips64" not supported. Please file bug repo= rt at 'http://code.google.com/p/mupen64plus/issues'. Stop. >> phase `build' failed after 0.3 seconds >> >> Arm failure message: >> starting phase `build' >> Makefile:116: Architecture "armv7l" not officially supported.' [...] > I don't have any ARM machine on which I could investigate this issue, > so for now I'll just mark Mupen as only for i686 and x86_64. When adding a =E2=80=98supported-systems=E2=80=99 field, it=E2=80=99s best = to add a comment above stating what evidence we have that some systems are not supported (in that case, that the top-level Makefile has a pre-defined list of supported architectures.) This helps others and your future self ;-) find out why this restriction is there and whether it still applies. Could you add such a comment? TIA, Ludo=E2=80=99.