Yeah, that's not the right way. Then it would be 3.0.13-0ubuntu1, and
not changed in the upstream version. Which is OK too, but I went ahead
and imported a git-archive export as 3.0.13+git20210716.269ef9d-1 in the
Debian repository and uploaded that to experimental with any-riscv64
(and any-ia64) added to Architecture.
In the PPA, there are a bunch of other changes to debian/rules that are not
advertised, such as
- changing from /usr/lib{32,64} to multi-arch paths (which is not where stuff
looks for it)
- a redundant addition of an arm64 architecture (any-arm64 is there already)
- I guess cross-compilation support?
I don't think we can apply the first one. We can apply the third one in
another upload, but I do want it mentioned in the changelog what's going
on. Well optimally, can you submit a merge against the gnu-efi salsa
repo with the compilation changes and describe it in the commit message
(first line will be used as changelog entry)? That would be best!
** Changed in: gnu-efi (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1938324
Title:
gnu-efi does not support RISC-V
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnu-efi/+bug/1938324/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
