Bug#724469: FTBFS on all big-endian architectures

[intrigeri]

Hi,

is it imaginable that a s390x porter gives this issue a try?

Upstream wrote back in October [1] "I'll try to get to this soon, but
I'd be more than happy to accept patches, too". Since then, a patch
was proposed that apparently fixes the issue on 32-bit big endian
architectures (attached both to the Debian and upstream bug reports).

This patch apparently needs some more work for 64-bit big endian
architectures, so I thought you might be interested :)

[1] https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=89552

[Aurelien Jarno]

Hi,

Post by intrigeri
Hi,
is it imaginable that a s390x porter gives this issue a try?
Upstream wrote back in October [1] "I'll try to get to this soon, but
I'd be more than happy to accept patches, too". Since then, a patch
was proposed that apparently fixes the issue on 32-bit big endian
architectures (attached both to the Debian and upstream bug reports).
This patch apparently needs some more work for 64-bit big endian
architectures, so I thought you might be interested :)
[1] https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=89552

Thanks a lot for working on that. The patch improves the things a bit on
s390x, but following the same principle with 32-bit types (see attached
patch), fixes even more issues. The testsuite looks like this
afterwards:

| t/arrays.t (Wstat: 9 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
| Failed test: 2
| Non-zero wait status: 9
| Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 29 tests but ran 2.
| t/callbacks.t (Wstat: 1536 Tests: 25 Failed: 6)
| Failed tests: 3, 6, 9, 14, 19, 25
| Non-zero exit status: 6
| t/enums.t (Wstat: 11 Tests: 1 Failed: 0)
| Non-zero wait status: 11
| Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 1.
| t/structs.t (Wstat: 65280 Tests: 4 Failed: 0)
| Non-zero exit status: 255
| Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 6 tests but ran 4.

While it doesn't fix all the issues the patch looks correct and IMHO can
already be merged, as the other issue will need changes in other parts
of the code.

Aurelien

[intrigeri]

Hi,

Post by Aurelien Jarno
While it doesn't fix all the issues the patch looks correct and IMHO can
already be merged, as the other issue will need changes in other parts
of the code.

Would you be kind enough to tell this (and attach the updated patch)
on the upstream ticket
(https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=89552), so that other
distros porters can comment and improve if needed? Note that there
have been a few comments on the initial patch there.

Otherwise, I'm fine with doing it myself, as long as the flow of
discussion I have to forward is not too intense.

Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc