Re: emdebian project status
>> * is emdebian integrated into the main archive?
> This is another question. I am myself against integration into Big Debian
> for base packages -- that thing would involve lots of organisational stuff
> which is hard to handle if you're not supported by kabal.. However, other
> people expressed
> lots of interest in "emdebian/ inside Debian source packages" approach
> and cooperation
> with Big Debian. Such a thing may be used for optional packages, but
> I'm not sure
> that would do for base.
>> * if yes, how is emdebian integrated into the source packages system?
> emdebian/ near debian/ in source packages is one possible approach.
> Another one is to integrate directly into debian/ of packages that we're
> interested at -- like, for example,
> debian-installer people did.
I think that separate emdebian/ has little chance to survive - because it's
too much maintaince overhaed with too few interested people to handle that.
Maybe a better thing is to introduce some sort of 'package build variants'
concept into debian source packages. A package should have 1 or more build
variant, and there should be a standard way to get available build variants
and to choose one to build. In this approach, main debian package could use
one variant, udeb - another one, emdebian - third one, and for some
packages local admin may choose to use non-default variant.
> Yes, for sure, policy is nearly a must.
>> * is now cross compiling handled with the normal dpkg-cross, an
>> unofficial dpkg-cross, stag itself?
>> * how do we cross compile in a debian way?
> As far as I understand, dpkg-cross is most-widely used cross-compilation
> way for Debian packages between people somehow involved into this mailing
> list :) However, for example, Nokia people use scratchbox as
> cross-compilation environment for Debian packages that they use.
> I would like to integrate both ways -- for example, make dpkg-cross play
> nicely with scratchbox's binary_misc solution.
Ok, I will look on that.
The most difficult thing with dpkg-cross and cross-toolchain maintaince is
almost no feedback, so I can only guess what to do with it next (and even
it is useful at all). Currently, there are two pending things with
dpkg-cross - to make it consistent with post-sarge dpkg and to integrate
Raphael's apt work. Any other ideas / feature requests / etc would be very