On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:37:56PM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
gcc:
(wheezy) http://sources.debian.net/src/gcc-4.7/4.7.2-5/debian/README.cross/
(jessie) http://sources.debian.net/src/gcc-4.8/4.8.3-13/debian/README.cross/
Fundamentally the standard way to build cross-compilers from
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:51:41PM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 22 November 2014 at 16:21, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
Dimitri wrote:
Thus multiarch cross tooling is not so relevant for fresh bootstraps,
and/or targeting non-debian architectures, or otherwise incomplete
systems
On 23 November 2014 at 11:23, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:51:41PM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 22 November 2014 at 16:21, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
Dimitri wrote:
Thus multiarch cross tooling is not so relevant for fresh bootstraps,
and/or targeting
+++ Dimitri John Ledkov [2014-11-23 12:27 +]:
On 23 November 2014 at 11:23, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:51:41PM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 22 November 2014 at 16:21, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
Dimitri wrote:
The newly introdued mualtiarch cross
Dimitri wrote:
Thus multiarch cross tooling is not so relevant for fresh bootstraps,
and/or targeting non-debian architectures, or otherwise incomplete
systems (e.g. those that do not have compatible set of pre-compiled
binaries that use multiarch-paths
I'll leave it to Helmut to talk about
On 21 November 2014 at 19:21, Sam Hartman hartm...@debian.org wrote:
Dimitri == Dimitri John Ledkov x...@debian.org writes:
Dimitri Comparing squeeze and jessies - have things regressed? if
Dimitri yes, how? As far as I expect, the way one uses debian
Dimitri source packaging to
On 22 November 2014 at 16:21, Ron r...@debian.org wrote:
Dimitri wrote:
Thus multiarch cross tooling is not so relevant for fresh bootstraps,
and/or targeting non-debian architectures, or otherwise incomplete
systems (e.g. those that do not have compatible set of pre-compiled
binaries that
Reading this bug report title history, it is very misleading.
Building cross-toolchains, and cross-toolchains that are multiarch
compatible has been possible to do before (stable) and is possible in
current planned release (testing).
I have provided the documentation links to that in
Helmut wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 04:41:49PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
Are people who are doing cross-building like this actually using the
code which will be in jessie? I (perhaps naïvely) would expect them to
be primarily using the code in unstable, and maybe at a late stage of
Ron == Ron r...@debian.org writes:
Ron I'd be kind of sad if that stopped being possible again for the
Ron final released version of Jessie, and we had to skip yet
Ron another release before being able to do this on Debian again.
Ron It may not be the best and final answer, but
Comparing squeeze and jessies - have things regressed? if yes, how?
As far as I expect, the way one uses debian source packaging to
produce cross toolchains has not changed, nor has been affected by
changes in jessie, in comparison to squeeze.
Multiarch cross-building - a brand new set of
Dimitri == Dimitri John Ledkov x...@debian.org writes:
Dimitri Comparing squeeze and jessies - have things regressed? if
Dimitri yes, how? As far as I expect, the way one uses debian
Dimitri source packaging to produce cross toolchains has not
Dimitri changed, nor has been
+++ Ben Longbons [2014-11-19 22:18 -0800]:
If the cross tools miss jessie and go in jessie-backports, that will
require a significant amount of knowledge and discipline on the part
of all the package maintainers involved, to make sure that they always
have matching versions despite being in
+++ Don Armstrong [2014-11-19 16:41 -0800]:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Helmut Grohne wrote:
I have to admit that the code is not exactly lightweight. I do
understand the desire to get rid it and asked that a ctte ruling does
not apply beyond jessie for that reason.
Are people who are doing
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Helmut Grohne wrote:
I have to admit that the code is not exactly lightweight. I do
understand the desire to get rid it and asked that a ctte ruling does
not apply beyond jessie for that reason.
Are people who are doing cross-building like this actually using the
code
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote:
Are people who are doing cross-building like this actually using the
code which will be in jessie? I (perhaps naïvely) would expect them to
be primarily using the code in unstable, and maybe at a late stage of
bring-up
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Ben Longbons wrote:
The code I work on isn't packaged for Debian yet, but without having
cross-compilers to play with, I will *never* be able to support
anything other than x86-*.
Which suite are you currently using? I'm asking, because I want to know
whether actually just
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Ben Longbons wrote:
The code I work on isn't packaged for Debian yet, but without having
cross-compilers to play with, I will *never* be able to support
anything other than x86-*.
Which suite are you
Hi Don,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 04:41:49PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
Are people who are doing cross-building like this actually using the
code which will be in jessie? I (perhaps naïvely) would expect them to
be primarily using the code in unstable, and maybe at a late stage of
bring-up
+++ Helmut Grohne [2014-11-01 10:38 +0100]:
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 01:46:48AM +, Wookey wrote:
To me that sounds like this method is actually the
current de-facto default in Debian - it is certainly at least on a par.
I don't think that a feature being de-facto default is a good
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 01:46:48AM +, Wookey wrote:
To me that sounds like this method is actually the
current de-facto default in Debian - it is certainly at least on a par.
I don't think that a feature being de-facto default is a good argument
to force maintaining it forever. There
+++ Helmut Grohne [2014-10-28 07:13 +0100]:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 09:41:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The most obvious bug is the one mentioned in the patch: #760770
It is about a bug in the implementation of with_deps_on_target_arch (the
contended feature).
I think I may not
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 09:41:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
The most obvious bug is the one mentioned in the patch: #760770
It is about a bug in the implementation of with_deps_on_target_arch (the
contended feature).
I think I may not understand what's going on here. In your mail to
Hi Don,
Thanks for taking this up.
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 02:59:13PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
Matthias: is the primary concern of including this patch one of
maintenance burden, not primarily technical?
If you want Matthias to answer your question, I think that you may want
to Cc him, but
Helmut Grohne writes (Bug#766708: Processed: Re: Bug#766708: breaks multiarch
cross building):
Since it is my interest to not cause more work on Matthias, I will try
to summarize his POV.
Thanks.
The most obvious bug is the one mentioned in the patch: #760770
It is about a bug
25 matches
Mail list logo
