On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 01:17:08PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote: > Hi, Hi,
> I now have current gcc, eglibc, perl and python building and used on > powerpcspe. > > Some Detail issues: > > At http://antcom.de/powerpcspe/patches/ there are my patches for > gcc-4.6, gcc-4.7 and gcc-defaults. Please remove *-multilib support from your patches, it should build without it. > gcc-4.7 only builds if I adjust the build environment further, see > gcc-4.7.sh and http://bugs.debian.org/637232 etc. gcc-4.7.sh should go. You should build a compiler with multiarch support, recompile libc and friends in order to place the libraries there. That was imho the point where I took a break :) So that could end up in work… > I'd like to hear some comments about those patches before I file them > agaist gcc-* packages. > > I'm especially wondering about our multiarch approach. Typically, > multiarch archs have >=2 archs (e.g. powerpc and powerpc64). However, > powerpcspe doesn't seem to have a sibling arch, therefore being "single" > multiarch, basically doing most stuff like the powerpc port for > simplicity. Is there anything that I should keep in mind here or that > I'm missing here? Ehm. Multiarch is okay. It will place the libraries under /lib/powerpc-linux-gnuspe/. That is okay. So you can install them on amd64 while cross compiling or so. We want multiarch :) Now we don't have and it looks that we won't have a 64bit CPU doing SPE floating point that means we don't want multilib. Please remove those from your gcc-patches. I think my old ones did not have those included. > The growing powerpcspe repo is still available at my server, augmenting > debian-ports: > > deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-ports/ sid main > deb http://www.antcom.de/powerpcspe/ unstable main > > One question about the boost library: In debian-ports, there is already > version 1.49.1.1, but in common unstable there is only 1.49.0.1. Is > there an important reason for this? Otherwise, I would just stay with > the version 1.49.0.1 built from unstable. Could you be more specific here please? I see 1.49.0-3.1 at http://packages.qa.debian.org/b/boost1.49.html http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/package.php?p=boost1.49 which looks fine. The boost-defaults package is 1.49.0.1. I don't see 1.49.1.1 anywhere. > > Thanks in advance, > > Roland Sebastian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
