-altdev packages (was Re: Bug#16987: xpm4g: attempts libc5 build on sparc)
On 12 Jan 1998, Mark W. Eichin wrote: I didn't realize there were that many altdev libraries. Since there never *were* libc5 X libs, I'd just as well not build altdev ones either -- it's not like we have a bo sparc release to support, right? Unless I hear some *really* good arguments, I'm not going to add an X altdev package, either... Maybe we should get rid of all the -altdev packages, and `altgcc'? I don't know what's the best alternative. I only thougth it was easy to build all the altdev stuff, and I did it. Comments? -- Juan Cespedes -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: -altdev packages (was Re: Bug#16987: xpm4g: attempts libc5 build on sparc)
Juan Cespedes wrote: On 12 Jan 1998, Mark W. Eichin wrote: I didn't realize there were that many altdev libraries. Since there never *were* libc5 X libs, I'd just as well not build altdev ones either -- it's not like we have a bo sparc release to support, right? Unless I hear some *really* good arguments, I'm not going to add an X altdev package, either... Maybe we should get rid of all the -altdev packages, and `altgcc'? I don't know what's the best alternative. I only thougth it was easy to build all the altdev stuff, and I did it. Comments? I built a altgcc package based on 2.7.2.3. I can upload it to help anyone. Furthermore, I'm repackaging libc5 for -altdev and will upload it soon (cwwith full sources). OTOH, libc5 library packages could be required to run any other binaries not coming from Debian. Regards. -- Eric Delaunay | La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant. Henri Jeanson (1900-1970) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: -altdev packages (was Re: Bug#16987: xpm4g: attempts libc5 build on sparc)
On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Eric Delaunay wrote: Juan Cespedes wrote: On 12 Jan 1998, Mark W. Eichin wrote: I didn't realize there were that many altdev libraries. Since there never *were* libc5 X libs, I'd just as well not build altdev ones either -- it's not like we have a bo sparc release to support, right? Unless I hear some *really* good arguments, I'm not going to add an X altdev package, either... Maybe we should get rid of all the -altdev packages, and `altgcc'? I don't know what's the best alternative. I only thougth it was easy to build all the altdev stuff, and I did it. Comments? I built a altgcc package based on 2.7.2.3. I can upload it to help anyone. Furthermore, I'm repackaging libc5 for -altdev and will upload it soon (cwwith full sources). OTOH, libc5 library packages could be required to run any other binaries not coming from Debian. But there is already an altgcc package and libc5-altdev. I uploaded yesterday a bunch of library packages which used altgcc and libc5-altdev, and built themselves libc5 compat packages Greg -- Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and feel angry. Egy pingvinre gyakorlatilag lehetetlen haragosan nezni. HuLUG: http://www.cab.u-szeged.hu/local/linux/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: -altdev packages (was Re: Bug#16987: xpm4g: attempts libc5 build on sparc)
OTOH, libc5 library packages could be required to run any other binaries not coming from Debian. altdev stuff already exists; my question is *why*. The answer appears to be that redhat had a bunch of libc5 X packages (I'm guessing, I joined the sparc side of the project late enough to be able to do a pure-debian installation...) However, mere existence of those binaries doesn't cut it. After all, practically everything from there exists in source form; we can just recompile and be done with it. Is there anything that's *not* recompilable that we need to be able to run? Otherwise, I'd just as well not build libc5 X libs -- they add a *big* chunk of time and disk space to an already immense build (and I only have an SS1+; if someone wants to send me an ultra and some faster disks, I wouldn't complain :-) In the meantime, I'm going to focus on getting a server to build (having snarfed enough missing defines from the sunos includes to get it to compile, I still need to find out where it lost functions like GetTimeInMillis, in order to get it to link...) I'll also note that currently, only the x86 and m68k build altdev X libs. The alpha and ppc ports specifically do not (and my default as X maintainer is to leave it off unless the port really needs it.) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
