Re: m68k Packages...
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hi guys,
> * binutils 184.108.40.206.2-1 (currently 220.127.116.11.37-1) (standard) (high)
> + Maintainer: Christopher C. Chimelis <email@example.com>
> + binutils uploaded 87 days ago, out of date by 85 days!
> + out of date on m68k: binutils, binutils-dev,
> binutils-multiarch (from 18.104.22.168-1)
> + there are up to date bins in m68k also
> + not considered
> This is mentioned in bug 74396 (grave, binutils); apparently binutils just
> plain hasn't worked on m68k since version 22.214.171.124.
I was trying to work with Roman on testing new versions, but the time lag
was getting to be too much of a hassle for me. I also have been trying to
gain access to an m68k to see if I can figure out what's going on, but no
luck on that so far.
> There are two options here: either to get binutils fixed for m68k (which would
> be ideal), or to fork binutils at version 126.96.36.199-1 and have a distinct
> binutils-m68k package that builds the appropriate debs for m68k.
I'm not averted to this. I'll think about it this week and double-check
CVS for anything that might fix things again. From my research last time,
though, nothing changed that should've affected that arch.
> It'd be nice to have one of these happen sooner, rather than later...