On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:40:47PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 06:09:17PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Also the libc6-msp430-dev:all and libc6-dev:msp430 packages will both be
using /usr/inlcude/msp430 triplet/
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 06:09:17PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Also the libc6-msp430-dev:all and libc6-dev:msp430 packages will both be
using /usr/inlcude/msp430 triplet/ and already trigger the problem you
fear.
No, libc6-msp430-dev would use
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:46:40PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
I expect the multiarch paths to replace the 'traditional
cross-compiling' paths in due course for all target architectures,
including ones that aren't Debian-suported (i.e currently
On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 06:09:17PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
It's not that non-self-hosting archs should be treated differently from
self-hosted archs, but that they should be treated the *same* including the
requirement that multiarch directories be reserved for packages of the
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 07:14:57PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
So I would be opposed to making such a change in policy for the time being;
I think cross-compilers should stick with the traditional cross-compiler
directories and stay away from the multiarch directories until we have more
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:46:40PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
I expect the multiarch paths to replace the 'traditional
cross-compiling' paths in due course for all target architectures,
including ones that aren't Debian-suported (i.e currently
mingw-whatever-you-call-it, avr32, msp430), for both
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:44:39 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de
wrote:
Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org writes:
So if I understand things correctly that would mean using /usr/lib/win32
and /usr/lib/win64, regardless of the binutils/gcc triplet (which is fine
as
If that is what
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 22:46:40 +0100, Wookey woo...@wookware.org wrote:
+++ Stephen Kitt [2011-04-24 19:14 +0200]:
So I would be opposed to making such a change in policy for the time
being; I think cross-compilers should stick with the traditional
cross-compiler directories and stay away
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:46:10 +0100, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 22:46 +0100, Wookey wrote:
[...]
I do think that getting the 'win32' arch name and triplet defined in
dpkg-architecture is stage 1 for you. I thought we'd already done that
years ago, when
Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org writes:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:51:53 +0200, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:29:39PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
I would rather add a new architecture to dpkg for this. This does not
mean that debian has to create a new
Hi Steve,
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:44:33 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04:59PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
Unfortunately this appears to go against policy 9.1.1, which forbids
packages installing files into triplet-based directories under /usr/lib
+++ Stephen Kitt [2011-04-24 19:14 +0200]:
So I would be opposed to making such a change in policy for the time being;
I think cross-compilers should stick with the traditional cross-compiler
directories and stay away from the multiarch directories until we have more
practical experience
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 22:46 +0100, Wookey wrote:
[...]
I do think that getting the 'win32' arch name and triplet defined in
dpkg-architecture is stage 1 for you. I thought we'd already done that
years ago, when this last came up, but obviously not.
dpkg-architecture already supports 269
Stephen Kitt scrisse:
Would it be acceptable to introduce an exception to policy allowing
this? Something along the lines of
An exception is granted for `Architecture: all' packages
containing libraries targeting platforms for which there is no Debian
architecture. Such
Hi,
Adam Borowski wrote:
Such dirs cannot include the compiler's name, since there are multiple
compilers for the architecture. Binaries compiled with
i586-mingw32msvc-gcc, i686-w64-mingw32-gcc and MSVC share the same ABI.
Even specific models of CPUs are no good: on i386, gcc -dumpmachine
Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org writes:
Hello,
Now that multiarch is here, I've been wondering whether and how it applies to
cross-compiler libraries for non-Debian architectures, for example Microsoft
Windows (I'm the new maintainer of mingw-w64). As I understand it, multiarch
wasn't intended
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 05:05:33AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi,
Adam Borowski wrote:
Such dirs cannot include the compiler's name, since there are multiple
compilers for the architecture. Binaries compiled with
i586-mingw32msvc-gcc, i686-w64-mingw32-gcc and MSVC share the same
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:29:39PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org writes:
Now that multiarch is here, I've been wondering whether and how it applies
to
cross-compiler libraries for non-Debian architectures.
[...]
It seems to me though that it would be nice
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:51:53 +0200, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:29:39PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
I would rather add a new architecture to dpkg for this. This does not
mean that debian has to create a new port or that the packages have to
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:38:57 +0200, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 05:05:33AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
IIUC then the GNU triplet includes the choice of C library because
binaries (e.g., libraries) compiled against mingw32 and mingw-w64
cannot be linked
Hi Stephen,
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04:59PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
Unfortunately this appears to go against policy 9.1.1, which forbids packages
installing files into triplet-based directories under /usr/lib other
than /usr/lib/$(dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_MULTIARCH). Since the files
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 11:19:24PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:51:53 +0200, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:29:39PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
I would rather add a new architecture to dpkg for this. This does not
mean that
Hello,
Now that multiarch is here, I've been wondering whether and how it applies to
cross-compiler libraries for non-Debian architectures, for example Microsoft
Windows (I'm the new maintainer of mingw-w64). As I understand it, multiarch
wasn't intended for non-Debian architectures, and this is
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04:59PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
Hello,
Now that multiarch is here, I've been wondering whether and how it applies to
cross-compiler libraries for non-Debian architectures, for example Microsoft
Windows (I'm the new maintainer of mingw-w64).
It seems to me
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
Policy also doesn't mention /usr/include/triplet; I saw that possibility
referred to in http://bugs.debian.org/542865.
Uhh... this looks like a nasty omission to me. If package libfoo-dev
differs between
25 matches
Mail list logo
