Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
I had exactly the same situation with fpc for fink and solved it exactly as suggested by Daniel Herzog. I would go for Individual bootstrap tar balls for each arch, because this saves a lot of bandwidth. I called the one for macosx/darwin: fpc-1.9.8.darwin.bootstrap.tar.gz. maybe it should be fpc-1.9.8.darwin-ppc.bootstrap.tar.gz. But since we do not support darwin-x86, yet, I did not consider the cpu :) The tar ball includes the bootstrap binary and the default fpc.cfg file. Is debian for linux only? If so, just the combination of linux with every cpu is needed, and not any combination of os and cpu. But even for a case of any os with any cpu, do you really think that case would be to much? What is your guess about the distribution impact through debian packages. I guess is that it is noticable, what actually have to wait and see the effect of the fink package. Best wishes ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Even better:
One single archive containing all ppc* starting compilers - this way i
could also package it quite easily for all arches, and it would easy to
script it using ppc${ARCH} everywhere...you see?
I don't see it. Because that package will be huge since you need a ppc for
every cpu-os combination.
Well...then on per cpu-os combination...for example ppc linux or
something - not neccessarily those seldomly used stuff like mips or so...
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
I had exactly the same situation with fpc for fink and solved it exactly as suggested by Daniel Herzog. I would go for Individual bootstrap tar balls for each arch, because this saves a lot of bandwidth. I called the one for macosx/darwin: fpc-1.9.8.darwin.bootstrap.tar.gz. maybe it should be fpc-1.9.8.darwin-ppc.bootstrap.tar.gz. But since we do not support darwin-x86, yet, I did not consider the cpu :) The tar ball includes the bootstrap binary and the default fpc.cfg file. Is debian for linux only? If so, just the combination of linux with every cpu is needed, and not any combination of os and cpu. But even for a case of any os with any cpu, do you really think that case would be to much? What is your guess about the distribution impact through debian packages. I guess is that it is noticable, what actually have to wait and see the effect of the fink package. Best wishes I want to package for Gentoo, which, for now, supports the following: alpha amd64 arm hppaia64mipsppc ppc64 ppc macos s390sh sparc x86 But the most important ones are x86, ppc and amd64. There even are devs working on *BSD - it works, but they didnt have official releases yet afaik. So if you just place a ppc386, ppcppc and a ppc??? somewhere that would be perfectly fine. For now i waste your bandwidth by getting the complete binary.tar. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Does the darwin ppcppc binary actually work on linux-ppc? ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On 30 mrt 2005, at 19:32, Dr. Karl-Michael Schindler wrote: Does the darwin ppcppc binary actually work on linux-ppc? No, you need a different ppcppc for that. Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Does the darwin ppcppc binary actually work on linux-ppc? No. - i just tought ppcppc was linux on ppcwell then, replace it with the correct one :-) $ ./ppcppc bash: ./ppcppc: cannot execute binary file $ file ppcppc ppcppc: Mach-O executable ppc $ file ppc386 ppc386: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 20:52 +0200, Daniel Herzog wrote: No. - i just tought ppcppc was linux on ppcwell then, replace it with the correct one :-) It is also called ppcppc on linux: $ file /usr/lib/fpc/1.9.4/ppcppc /usr/lib/fpc/1.9.4/ppcppc: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped Therefore, you'd have to have something like both ppcppclinux and ppcppcosx for your scheme to work. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
RE: [fpc-devel] Packaging
the second part of the filename of the compiler specifies the target cpu (ie what cpu it produces code for) no information on the system the compiler itself is meant to run on is contained in the file name -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daniel Herzog Sent: 30 March 2005 19:52 To: FPC developers' list Subject: Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging Does the darwin ppcppc binary actually work on linux-ppc? No. - i just tought ppcppc was linux on ppcwell then, replace it with the correct one :-) $ ./ppcppc bash: ./ppcppc: cannot execute binary file $ file ppcppc ppcppc: Mach-O executable ppc $ file ppc386 ppc386: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 20:52 +0200, Daniel Herzog wrote: No. - i just tought ppcppc was linux on ppcwell then, replace it with the correct one :-) It is also called ppcppc on linux: $ file /usr/lib/fpc/1.9.4/ppcppc /usr/lib/fpc/1.9.4/ppcppc: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped Therefore, you'd have to have something like both ppcppclinux and ppcppcosx for your scheme to work. All files should have arch+os+version_it_is_meant_to_bootstrap. Both OS and arch are a bit dangerous, since FPC notation, ppcx notation, GNU notation and uname notation might not match. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
I think this should be a nice solution: bootstrap-arch-os-the version i can bootstrap with this.tar.gz This results in: bootstrap-386-linux-1.9.8.tar.gz containing a 1.0.10 version binary, for example. Please note i used 386 for arch, not x86, or something. So arch is always a valid ppc* ending. This eases up scripting. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
I think this should be a nice solution: bootstrap-arch-os-the version i can bootstrap with this.tar.gz This results in: bootstrap-386-linux-1.9.8.tar.gz containing a 1.0.10 version binary, for example. Please note i used 386 for arch, not x86, or something. So arch is always a valid ppc* ending. This eases up scripting. In the FPC crosbuild and installation scripts there are some conversions for this, e.g. # conversion from long to short archname for ppcx case $FPCTARGET in m68k*) PPCSUFFIX=68k;; sparc*) PPCSUFFIX=sparc;; i386*) PPCSUFFIX=386;; powerpc*) PPCSUFFIX=ppc;; arm*) PPCSUFFIX=arm;; x86_64*) PPCSUFFIX=x64;; mips*) PPCSUFFIX=mips;; ia64*) PPCSUFFIX=ia64;; alpha*) PPCSUFFIX=alpha;; esac See install/ directory. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Hi all, In order to get fpc into portage, the gentoo packaging system it would be necessary to make available a bootstrap tar ball (640 KB) with the ppc386 binary and a default fpc.cfg file. My suggestion would be the same dir as the fpc source tar ball, i.e. ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/mirrors/fpc/beta/source-1.9.8/ Comments? Questions? Best wishes - Daniel Herzog (Shamelessly snaffled, defaced, abandond from here: http://www.nl.freepascal.org/lists/fpc-devel/2005-March/004784.html) :-) Sources shouldn't contain binaries. Bootstrapping compilers is always a chicken-and-egg story. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Daniel Herzog wrote: Hi all, In order to get fpc into portage, the gentoo packaging system it would be necessary to make available a bootstrap tar ball (640 KB) with the ppc386 binary and a default fpc.cfg file. 640 K ? Is that a joke ? The compiler sources alone are more than 2Mb ? It makes no sense to do this for a distribution. You can simply use the .tar.gz file and extract that to the needed places. Michael. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Daniel Herzog wrote: Hi all, In order to get fpc into portage, the gentoo packaging system it would be necessary to make available a bootstrap tar ball (640 KB) with the ppc386 binary and a default fpc.cfg file. 640 K ? Is that a joke ? The compiler sources alone are more than 2Mb ? I think he means only the cmdline compiler. A fpc.cfg doesn't matter for bootstrap purposes. (and would be location dependant, and thus useless anyway) This because the main src archive is not OS-ARCH specific. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On 29 mrt 2005, at 15:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: In order to get fpc into portage, the gentoo packaging system it would be necessary to make available a bootstrap tar ball (640 KB) with the ppc386 binary and a default fpc.cfg file. 640 K ? Is that a joke ? The compiler sources alone are more than 2Mb ? He's talking about just a compiler binary (which, in combination with the sources, can be used to bootstrap). Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Marco van de Voort wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Daniel Herzog wrote: Hi all, In order to get fpc into portage, the gentoo packaging system it would be necessary to make available a bootstrap tar ball (640 KB) with the ppc386 binary and a default fpc.cfg file. 640 K ? Is that a joke ? The compiler sources alone are more than 2Mb ? I think he means only the cmdline compiler. A fpc.cfg doesn't matter for bootstrap purposes. (and would be location dependant, and thus useless anyway) This because the main src archive is not OS-ARCH specific. Ah, this makes more sense... Michael. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Okay. I'll totally rephrase this now: Gentoo builds (almost) everything from source. This is done via ebuilds. There is grap this file: ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/source-1.9.8/fpc-1.9.8.source.tar.gz And compile and install it. Don't expect this directory to exists very long. When the release is made this directory is moved to an other place. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Okay. I'll totally rephrase this now: Gentoo builds (almost) everything from source. This is done via ebuilds. There is grap this file: ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/source-1.9.8/fpc-1.9.8.source.tar.gz And compile and install it. Don't expect this directory to exists very long. When the release is made this directory is moved to an other place. When this directory doesnt exist anymore a new version of the ebuild is released and that's it. Every project from time to time changes it's files... ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Daniel Herzog wrote:
Okay. I'll totally rephrase this now:
Gentoo builds (almost) everything from source.
This is done via ebuilds.
There is grap this file:
ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/source-1.9.8/fpc-1.9.8.source.tar.gz
And compile and install it.
To do this, i need a starting compiler, nothing more.
It would be nice to have a starting compiler like here:
ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/source-1.9.8/ppcARCH
And it would also be nice if you only need the version of your source -
like 1.9.8 - and can script the location of the starting compiler from
that. Like, in my case:
ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/source-${MY_P}/ppcARCH
Which means, the location of the starting compiler should please not
change randomly, but change with the versions...like the source tarballs
also do.
Another thing needed is, surprise!, that the corresponding starting
compiler works, e.g. always is the binary taken from here:
ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/Linux/ARCH/separate/binary.tar
But without all the unit's and stuff, which isnt needed to bootstrap...
I hope this clarified things a bit...
This was clear from the beginning :)
But thank you for taking the trouble yo elaborate.
We're discussing on the core list how we can accomodate for things like this.
We'll send a mail with the outcome.
Michael.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Thanks. I'll, for now, work around it using the binary.tar. In practise, the only problem is the bigger download, and getting the ppc386 out of it... This was clear from the beginning :) But thank you for taking the trouble yo elaborate. We're discussing on the core list how we can accomodate for things like this. We'll send a mail with the outcome. Michael. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Even better:
One single archive containing all ppc* starting compilers - this way i
could also package it quite easily for all arches, and it would easy to
script it using ppc${ARCH} everywhere...you see?
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
A sample configuration, or the great (i really like it) samplecfg tool, are needed, to avoid possibly broken/outdated/... /etc/fpc.cfg files please add this somehow too. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
A sample configuration, or the great (i really like it) samplecfg tool, are needed, to avoid possibly broken/outdated/... /etc/fpc.cfg files please add this somehow too. I'm sorry. Forget about it - OPT=-n solves it... ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
[fpc-devel] Packaging
Hi guys. It would be nice if you could add a starting compiler to your source packages, this eases up packaging with gentoo alot. this is especially important for the 1.9.x series, which is changed. (the stable release looks kinda freezed until 2.0.0 is released) daniel ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Packaging
Hi guys. It would be nice if you could add a starting compiler to your source packages, this eases up packaging with gentoo alot. this is especially important for the 1.9.x series, which is changed. (the stable release looks kinda freezed until 2.0.0 is released) Sources shouldn't contain binaries. Bootstrapping compilers is always a chicken-and-egg story. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
