On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:21:09AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > Which works great, if it's libc-dev that's needed. It fails fairly > severely, if a specific version of a library is needed due to, say, a fix > in an included library that also requires a fix in the application. > > Not to mention packages like GCC, which use m4 substitution based on ARCH > to decide whether to put in a libc12-dev or a libc-6dev, for fairly good > reasons. Of course, as I said before, *most* of those changes are already > in place anyway. > > I don't think I've ever filed a patch using arch-specific stuff for > netbsd-i386 in the Depends or Build-Depends that did not involve something > that would have (msot likely) been different between the two. Changing > the libc is such a fundamental thing that it cascades throughout the port > rapidly, in any place that it matters in the first place. > > Which presents a fairly difficult situation. While I'm happy to use system > type, when that is, in fact, the applicable switch (and, stipulated, it may > well be applicable in some places where ARCH has been used to date), its' > going to be fairly difficult to argue that either port is 'useable' when > the patches aren't integrated at all. (Plus, frequently, maintainers have > asked for changes to the patches, before accepting them; thus, what lives > in a CVS area, which is what I did while starting, may often not resemble > the final results). > > Which is all a long way of saying that I don't see an easy solution, and > that people are probably right in being frustrated by the entire lack of > coherence of the 'Debian BSD port' effort. I don't think we even have > enough people to take a meaningful straw poll (though I could be mistaken, > of course).
I understand your concerns. All I can say is I appreciate your good intention to address compatible architecture handling in the best of our possibilities, and that coherence is a goal that takes time to attain in most situations. So, be patient.. -- Robert Millan "[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work." -- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)
