This patch (taken from ITK) make most issues go away:
But it was never included in VXL. Maybe there is a good reason for not
including it. As a side note, some x86 machine do not support SSE2
anyway. So VXL is by designed only support on x86 + SSE2.
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Matthew Leotta <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Is it the case that a previous release of VXL built on all of these platforms? If so, then I agree that this is a regression and is probably something that can be fixed with a reasonable amount of effort. However, I was not aware that VXL was ever tested on, for example, ARM architectures. If it has never worked on these platforms then I expect the effort to make it work could be more significant and it would be better to just mark the package as linux-i386 and linux-amd64 only.
> Personally I would love to see VXL run on ARM, but I don't have the time to help make that happen. I don't think we have any ARM builds on the dashboard so developers are likely unaware of any issues with compiling on ARM.
> Maybe I should purchase a Raspberry Pi and turn it into a VXL dashboard build … :)
> On Jan 10, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Mathieu Malaterre <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Mathieu Malaterre
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> Here is the status of VXL 1.17 compilation on debian buildds systems:
>>> VXL does not seems to support anything except x86 and x86_64 based CPUs.
>>> Thanks for comments,
>> My question is not very clear. What I am asking is:
>> " as a packager of VXL, should I mark this package as linux-i386 and
>> linux-amd64 only package ? "
>> It is considered a regression, for a package to loose supported arch
>> in Debian, so I would need at least an ACK from the -maint team to
>> help this transition.
>> Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
>> with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
>> MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
>> Vxl-maintainers mailing list