Re: Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
Florian Weimer wrote: Some packages (notably compilers) avoid cyclic build dependencies by shipping some sort of pre-compiled blob in the source package. This blob is then used to compile the package. Does this fullfil the requirement that packages in main must be built from source code? Where exactly is this requirement? Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is nothing wrong with using a precompiled compiler to bootstrap the package in Debian, but after there is a working package in the archive it should not be used anymore (for reliability issues, not freedom issues). What do you mean by reliability here? From a package-building perspective, I find it to be more reliable to use the precompiled blop because then I can make sure that the package compiles in a minimal environment. Otherwise I need to depend on a *specific* prior version of the compiler, thus making the build more fragile (think Ubuntu), or I need to depend on a wide range on prior versions of the compiler, making testing much harder. Cheers, -- Jens Peter Secher. _DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_. A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion. Q. Why is top posting bad? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
Le jeudi 31 juillet 2008 à 10:07 +0200, Jens Peter Secher a écrit : What do you mean by reliability here? From a package-building perspective, I find it to be more reliable to use the precompiled blop because then I can make sure that the package compiles in a minimal environment. Otherwise I need to depend on a *specific* prior version of the compiler, thus making the build more fragile (think Ubuntu), or I need to depend on a wide range on prior versions of the compiler, making testing much harder. If your code needs a specific version of the compiler, you have a serious issue here anyway. For example if a bug in the compiler is found that requires the package to be rebuilt, it will remain broken if it cannot simply use the latest version. -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code. `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to `-our own. Resistance is futile. signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some packages (notably compilers) avoid cyclic build dependencies by shipping some sort of pre-compiled blob in the source package. This blob is then used to compile the package. Does this fullfil the requirement that packages in main must be built from source code? Is there really no interest in this topic? There is nothing wrong with using a precompiled compiler to bootstrap the package in Debian, but after there is a working package in the archive it should not be used anymore (for reliability issues, not freedom issues). And anyway, a working binary program is not a pre-compiled blob. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
* Florian Weimer: Some packages (notably compilers) avoid cyclic build dependencies by shipping some sort of pre-compiled blob in the source package. This blob is then used to compile the package. Does this fullfil the requirement that packages in main must be built from source code? Is there really no interest in this topic? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Florian Weimer: Some packages (notably compilers) avoid cyclic build dependencies by shipping some sort of pre-compiled blob in the source package. This blob is then used to compile the package. Does this fullfil the requirement that packages in main must be built from source code? Is there really no interest in this topic? Are you sure there's a requirement that packages must *be built* from source code? Do you have a reference for that? I only recall a requirement that the corresponding source code must, when compiled, result in the binary package. I don't know whether that helps with this particular Gordian knot. -- \ “I have a large seashell collection, which I keep scattered on | `\the beaches all over the world. Maybe you've seen it.” —Steven | _o__) Wright | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bootstrapping from binary blob shipped in the source package
Some packages (notably compilers) avoid cyclic build dependencies by shipping some sort of pre-compiled blob in the source package. This blob is then used to compile the package. Does this fullfil the requirement that packages in main must be built from source code? The alternative would be a cyclic build dependency, like the one we have for GCC, binutils, libc etc. A potential issue is that if upstream breaks self-compilation, a manual upload on all affected architectures is required. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
