On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:37:38 +0200 Jonas Meyer <quitte@gmail.com> wrote: > Package: dpkg-cross > Version: 2.0.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Hi, > To create toolchains that have a new debian name than an already existing > architecture it'd be useful if something like this worked: > > dpkg-cross -a uclibc-mipsel -i libc6_2.6.1-6_mipsel.deb > dpkg-cross: libc6_2.6.1-6_mipsel.deb has wrong architecture (mipsel) > dpkg-cross: conversion of libc6_2.6.1-6_mipsel.deb failed. > > Please consider adding an option to disable that check. When building the new package, where would the code to support this option need to put the files? /usr/uclibc-mipsel/lib or /usr/mipsel/lib ? for libc-uclibc-mipsel-cross_2.6.1-6_all.deb ? Also note: $ dpkg-architecture -auclibc-mipsel unknown Debian architecture uclibc-mipsel, you must specify GNU system type, too at /usr/bin/dpkg-architecture line 159. As dpkg-cross merges back into dpkg, dpkg-cross will increasingly rely on dpkg code. Just disabling the check isn't going to be sufficient. I am unsure how much dpkg-cross 2.x will be able to support architectures that are not already supported in dpkg-architecture and adding code to dpkg-cross that cannot be supported by dpkg is futile as dpkg-cross is expected to be removed before Lenny is released. CC'ing debian-embedded so that others working on uclibc can contribute ideas on how dpkg and dpkg-cross can support unknown and new architectures. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgp_jLeA1vgZt.pgp
Description: PGP signature