On 2019-02-06, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> The u-boot-sunxi package contains a bunch of u-boot images which can be
> written to SD cards or sent over USB to the device via sunxi-fel.
> There's no binary which actually runs under Linux. As such I think it's
> appropriate to switch to arch:all, allowing it's installation on other
> machines which are creating the SD image or remotely debugging the sunxi
> device.

Interesting timing... yesterday I worked on updating Ivo De Decker's
work on cross-building u-boot images for multiple architectures and
building an arch:all u-boot-qemu package:

  https://bugs.debian.org/907573

Which demonstrates that in theory it would be possible to make almost
all of the u-boot packages arch:all... essentially any architecture with
working cross-compilers for amd64.


On the other hand, people went through a lot of trouble to make
multi-arch a reality, and you can also install u-boot-sunxi packages
using multi-arch.


I'm not sure what all of the implications are for building more u-boot
packages as arch:all ... some that come to mind:

All of the u-boot-sunxi platforms for both armhf and arm64 would end up
in a single package, which might be unfortunate on some
resource-constrained systems...

Ideally for the end-user, there would be one package per u-boot target,
but I've thus far only broken it up by rough approximations of SoC
families to mitigate the proliferation of many small packages and
getting stuck in NEW for every new platform added.

Being able to do development on a faster platform (e.g. amd64) would be
nice, although in most cases u-boot is already fairly cross-buildable
for any target where this would be feasible, so that seems a mixed
argument.


One thought would be to build a single arch:all package with all of the
cross-buildable targets, and appropriate Provides and Conflicts on other
u-boot-* packages, while still building natively as well... maybe a
little redundant essentially having the same u-boot images in two
places.


Certainly too late for buster, of course, but an interesting idea to
mull over for bullseye...


live well,
  vagrant

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to