{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/164","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/164/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/164/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/164/events","html_url":"https://github.com/gogo/protobuf/issues/164","id":145780033,"number":164,"title":"Multiple test failures on 32-bit (and Big Endian) architectures","user":{"login":"onlyjob","id":1061236,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1061236?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob","html_url":"https://github.com/onlyjob","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/onlyjob/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":23,"created_at":"2016-04-04T19:24:18Z","updated_at":"2016-04-18T12:13:25Z","closed_at":"2016-04-13T13:23:54Z","body":"As reported in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819994\r\n\r\n> Builds of golang-gogoprotobuf on 32-bit architectures such as i386 and on\r\n> ppc64 (the only big-endian architecture on which its build dependencies\r\n> were available) all failed with test suite errors because various results\r\n> weren't as expected.  The details vary by architecture, per\r\n\r\n> https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=golang-gogoprotobuf&ver=0.2-1\r\n\r\n> Could you please take a look?\r\n\r\nSee full build logs on [armel](https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=golang-gogoprotobuf&arch=armel&ver=0.2-1&stamp=1459277430), [armhf](https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=golang-gogoprotobuf&arch=armhf&ver=0.2-1&stamp=1459277371), [i386](https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=golang-gogoprotobuf&arch=i386&ver=0.2-1&stamp=1459276381) and [ppc64](https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=golang-gogoprotobuf&arch=ppc64&ver=0.2-1&stamp=1459277863).\r\nTests do not fail only on _amd64_, _arm64_ and _ppc64el_.\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/comments/211353201","html_url":"https://github.com/gogo/protobuf/issues/164#issuecomment-211353201","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gogo/protobuf/issues/164","id":211353201,"user":{"login":"awalterschulze","id":1829933,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1829933?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze","html_url":"https://github.com/awalterschulze","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/awalterschulze/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-04-18T12:13:25Z","updated_at":"2016-04-18T12:13:25Z","body":"This could be useful to help and detect the architecture.\r\nhttps://golang.org/src/runtime/internal/sys/zgoarch_ppc64.go\r\n\r\nI could then revert unsafe code generation to normal code generation, giving exactly the same behaviour, just a little bit slower.\r\nMaybe that could work?"}}