On Fri, Jul 16, 2010, Hector Oron wrote: > In that case, Debian was clear > to take it as another architecture, but, nowadays, > arm-none-linux-gnueabi supports hard, soft and softfp. Bringing old > discussions up to front, would not make sense to have ABI support in > the distribution itself (which really is an overhead) and not in the > upstream code?
We need a new port because the binaries are incompatible with each others, we need a different triplet because it's a dpkg limitation. Perhaps we could change dpkg to not require that anymore, but we'd still need a new port. We also need a different triplet for the multiarch use case; I know you're not too interested in multiarch yourself anymore, but it's safer to pick a different triplet nevertheless IMHO, using the vendor field. -- Loïc Minier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
