Autoconf build targets

2002-05-19 Thread Matthew Garrett
In porting stuff, I've found several cases where modifying the source to build on Debian potentially breaks it on plain NetBSD. After talking to Nathan about this, we came up with a couple of ideas: 1) Modify the kernel build so uname -v includes Debian - this is a pretty trivial change. It does

Re: Autoconf build targets

2002-05-19 Thread Nathan Hawkins
Matthew Garrett wrote: In porting stuff, I've found several cases where modifying the source to build on Debian potentially breaks it on plain NetBSD. After talking to Nathan about this, we came up with a couple of ideas: 1) Modify the kernel build so uname -v includes Debian - this is a pretty

Re: Autoconf build targets

2002-05-19 Thread Robert Millan
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 06:51:34PM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote: Matthew Garrett wrote: 1) Modify the kernel build so uname -v includes Debian - this is a pretty trivial change. It does present problems if people build kernels on their own - one option would be to make sure that the kernel

Re: Autoconf build targets

2002-05-19 Thread Michael Goetze
This means that people building packages will have to be running a patched version of the kernel? It means that you have to be running the system you are building for. This is the same as for every other port of Debian. It looks weird to me, also some packages checking for kernel version

Re: Autoconf build targets

2002-05-19 Thread Joel Baker
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 07:06:47PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: In porting stuff, I've found several cases where modifying the source to build on Debian potentially breaks it on plain NetBSD. After talking to Nathan about this, we came up with a couple of ideas: 1) Modify the kernel build

Diffs between Linux, the Hurd and *BSD ports of Debian - constructiveness

2002-05-19 Thread Grzegorz Prokopski
Hi all! I have been following recent discussion about the Hurd closely - under where do NEW packages go on both d-d and d-hurd lists (not all was crossposted, so you surely missed some if didn't read both lists). From what I have seen there I think that direct cause for all the flamewar were:

Re: Diffs between Linux, the Hurd and *BSD ports of Debian - constructiveness

2002-05-19 Thread Nathan Hawkins
Grzegorz Prokopski wrote: Hi all! I have been following recent discussion about the Hurd closely - under where do NEW packages go on both d-d and d-hurd lists (not all was crossposted, so you surely missed some if didn't read both lists). From what I have seen there I think that direct cause for

Re: Diffs between Linux, the Hurd and *BSD ports of Debian - constructiveness

2002-05-19 Thread Grzegorz Prokopski
W licie z nie, 19-05-2002, godz. 14:32, Grzegorz Prokopski pisze: [...] Most of the developers is familiar with the first one and have no time to dig around to learn more about the others. That's why there's so little understanding of all the issues here (and lots of flames). [...] For every

Re: Diffs between Linux, the Hurd and *BSD ports of Debian - constructiveness

2002-05-19 Thread Grzegorz Prokopski
Again my repost of Marcus Brinkmann post (he's good at it - ain't he?;-) so that it didn't get lost in the flamefest. This one is about /hurd (and a bit about translators, even if they're not any problem here) Read on. Grzegorz Prokopski