Cross-compilers

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

[ Moving to -policy ].

Lintian warns about the use of /usr/i386-gnu as a non-standard directory
in the gcc-i386-gnu package I maintain, and it also warns about the use
of /usr/m68k-linux in the gcc-m68k-linux package maintained by Martin
Mitchell.

These packages are cross-compilers and the paths they use are
currently derived from the cross-compiler guidelines in gcc's INSTALL
document (by just replacing /usr/local by /usr).

Darren Benham objects to adding this to the override file for lintian,
because he says this is not FHS-compliant. [ He suggests something like
/usr/lib/<pkg>/i386 ].

Martin Mitchell says that "The compiling environments are well defined
already, established in the standards, there is absolutely no compelling
reason to move it to something Debian specific.". I share this opinion
as well, doing it differently would be a lot of work without any real
benefit.

Richard Braakman points ot that the FHS is very clear:

  No large software packages should use a direct subdirectory under the
  /usr hierarchy. [...]

I think that a cross-compiler is not a "large" software package like the X
Window System.

So, the questions:

* Is /usr/<architecture-string> really forbidden by the FHS for a
cross-compiler? [ Is a cross-compiler "large" enough to be considered a
"large" software package? ].

* In case they are "forbidden" by the FHS. What are the real benefits
of Debian following the FHS in this case?

* Should we add a paragraph to the policy so that this is allowed?

Opinions?

Thanks.

-- 
 "21f5e90682bd05df5c7735916b21cd4a" (a truly random sig)