On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:21:57PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 15:29, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:08:16AM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > > > Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 07:17:13PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > > >> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 06:43:09PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > > >> > And Nikita just pointed out there's libc6-i686. It might make sense > > > >> > to add > > > >> > linux-i686 too. I'm open for discussing that, but this discussion > > > >> > doesn't > > > >> > belong on the ITP bug. > > > >> > > > >> And why is it only for 2.6 kernels? The processor specific package > > > >> should > > > >> support NPTL, and it doesn't require 2.6... > > > > > > > > That sentence is contradictory - NPTL requires 2.6. > > > > > > But there should be a non-NPTL i686-optimized libc6 too, as in > > > /lib/i686/cmov/ in addtion to the current /lib/tls/i686/cmov/. > > > > Gotta draw the line somewhere. We chose to draw it there. > > > > Building glibc four times on x86 hardware seems to be a bit excessive > > for our needs. > > How long does a glibc compile take? > > Eg., would just basic i386 binaries, with say a -builder version > (or script - anything remotely along the lines of gentoo), be a > better way to optimize packages? For example: > > optimize-build --auto-detect-current-platform > --arch i686 --no-mmx > my-package-that-really-needs-maximum-optimization > > Packages (such as kernel, glibc, gimp) could optionally provide a > "hints" file with optmized build recommendations (+'ve as well as > -'ve) which could be overridden, etc. > > (I haven't used or looked at gentoo, so I don't know if what I am > saying is plain silly or not ...) > > Such a scheme would have the advantages of: > - minimizing debian repo size (no custom optimized binary packages) > - optimal optimization as opposed to lcd/"lowest denominator" optimize > > and at least the disadvantages of: > - not so simple to get optimized build > (although possibly could configure to auto optimize some packages) > - optimized-build local packaging scripts would need to be written > (ie. it doesn't yet exist) > > There are surely more (dis)advantages not on the top of my head...
- Bugs caused by specific tool versions would become unreproducible and even less predictable. No, thank you. I don't think it's appropriate for Debian to do this. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
