Re: Alphas and libc dependencies
Miquel van Smoorenburg writes (Re: Alphas and libc dependencies): You (Ian Jackson) wrote: ... 2a. Give the package containing our version of glibc version 0 the name libc5. 2b. Implement version numbers for virtual packages so that we can use one here. I think 2b should be done; [...] if this would work: Provides: libc5_5.2.18-8, ldso_ 1.7.14-4, timezone_7.48-3, libdb1_1.85.2-8, libgdbm1_1.7.3-11 it would solve a huge problem. The problem is that this is quite a significant amount of work, and I don't really have time to deal with it now. (Incidentally, the syntax would be `Provides: libc5 (5.2.18-8), ldso (1.7.14-4)' c.) ... Would it be very hard to put this in dpkg? Oh and would you like to have the Alpha patches for dpkg first so you can integrate them into the normal version (would make it easier for me). Certainly you should send me your patches. IME architecture patches fall into two categories: bug fixes where I made a mistake (which I'll fix straight away if I can, for example by using your supplied patch) and workarounds for architecture-specific braindamage. I've had some problems with the latter and m68k and ELF, and I have to say that I'm very reluctant to put in `workaround' patches. You have been warned :-). Ian.
Re: Alphas and libc dependencies
Miquel van Smoorenburg writes (Re: Alphas and libc dependencies): ... In addition to my last message, here is an alternative I've just though of. Why don't we just provide dummy (eg empty) libc5, libdb1 etc packages, and let libc6 depend on them. Then libc5 etc _will_ be installed.. I think that's what I'll do until Ian has implemented version numbers for virtual packages (if that's a reasonable solution that is). Well, it's not ideal - in particular, it means that you can deinstall libc6 when you clearly ought not to. How about doing it the other way around - having an empty libc5 package which depends on libc6 ? This is obviously a bit of a nasty hack, but it will have the right effect. Ian.
Re: Alphas and libc dependencies
You (Ian Jackson) wrote: All our (ELF i386 and m68k binary) packages are built to build with a dependency on `libc5'. The Alpha people are not using the standard Linux libc; instead, they're using a version of the GNU libc, with a current major number of 0 by the looks of things. No, at the moment the library is installed as /lib/libc-1.93.so with major 6 (and a symlink libc.so.6 to it). It also has numerous other little shared libs in /usr/lib.. As far as I can see we have two ways we can solve this problem: 1. Come up with some kind of scheme, more or less formal, for modifying these dependencies at build-time. At one extreme, the alpha distribution builders write a wrapper around dpkg-deb which fixes up the dependencies. At the other we come up with an automatic scheme for determining shared library dependencies (this will be hard work). This is ugly, but could be done. 2a. Give the package containing our version of glibc version 0 the name libc5. 2b. Implement version numbers for virtual packages so that we can use one here. I think 2b should be done; I've built glibc on our alpha, and dpkg, ncurses, perl etc. I tried letting libc provide other packages like: Provides: elf-libc, libc5, ldso, timezone, libdb1, libgdbm1 Description: The GNU C library version 6 (run-time libraries). Yes, all this stuff is built from glibc. Most of these are base packages so that's no problem. Anyway if this would work: Provides: libc5_5.2.18-8, ldso_ 1.7.14-4, timezone_7.48-3, libdb1_1.85.2-8, libgdbm1_1.7.3-11 it would solve a huge problem. I understand that the plan is to eventually merge the Linux and GNU libc's, and this'll probably produce a libc6, so whatever solution we come up with will only have to last until then. Would it be very hard to put this in dpkg? Oh and would you like to have the Alpha patches for dpkg first so you can integrate them into the normal version (would make it easier for me). Mike. -- Miquel van| Cistron Internet Services --Alphen aan den Rijn. Smoorenburg, | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cistron.nl/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Tel: +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data)
Re: Alphas and libc dependencies
You (Ian Jackson) wrote: All our (ELF i386 and m68k binary) packages are built to build with a dependency on `libc5'. The Alpha people are not using the standard Linux libc; instead, they're using a version of the GNU libc, with a current major number of 0 by the looks of things. In addition to my last message, here is an alternative I've just though of. Why don't we just provide dummy (eg empty) libc5, libdb1 etc packages, and let libc6 depend on them. Then libc5 etc _will_ be installed.. I think that's what I'll do until Ian has implemented version numbers for virtual packages (if that's a reasonable solution that is). Mike. -- Miquel van| Cistron Internet Services --Alphen aan den Rijn. Smoorenburg, | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cistron.nl/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Tel: +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data)
