Re: Bug#1087824: openal-soft: FTBFS on armel: static assertion failed: std::atomic<std::chrono::nanoseconds>::is_always_lock_free

Hi,

On Tue, 2024-11-19 at 10:47 +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/kcat/openal-soft/issues/1059
> 
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 09:33:52 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/core/device.cpp:12:54: error: static assertion failed
> >    12 |
> > static_assert(std::atomic<std::chrono::nanoseconds>::is_always_lock_free);
> 
> If OpenAL now requires lock-free atomics, then I think that's going to be
> unfixable on armel: if its upstream developer will not revert the change
> (which I suspect they will not want to) then it will have to be removed
> from armel.

That sounds a little too drastic to me. I think we should do a little more
investigation to figure out what the actual underlying issue is. Maybe
openal can be configured differently on armel and sh4.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer
`. `'   Physicist
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913