[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: etch-m68k and newer packages

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Ingo J?rgensmann wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:10:49AM -0600, Stephen R. Marenka wrote:
> > On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo J??rgensmann wrote:
> > > On a sidenote it seems that Arrakis and Spice aren't building 
> > > packages anymore. Are they still needed?
> > Sid is broken last I checked. I haven't really seen a great deal of 
> > interest in getting it fixed. We haven't built anything in some months 
> > I believe. It's a bummer.
> Hmpf... so, currently it doesn't make much sense to keep the machines 
> running, until some issues are solved?

There are some packages that I'd like to see built under etch-m68k. From 
the gcc-4.2 build failures that Stephen showed us, I have my doubts about 
packages in the testing/unstable suites.

I'd like to see some etch-m68k buildds put to work on the NPTL tool chain. 
I was able to cross-compile the debian sources plus TLS/NPTL patches.

There's still a couple of issues. Firstly the ABI is not finalized. But 
that doesn't mean that the exercise is not useful. In particular, 
binutils-2.19.51 can be uploaded. The new kernel and kernel headers would 
then be needed, but cannot be uploaded.

Another issue is one of the requirements of eglibc-2.10, which is gcc >= 
4.2. One way around that is to patch out that version check for building 
the glibc headers. Given the headers, it is possible to build gcc-4.4.

The third issue that comes to mind is gcc itself. It seems to me that all 
gcc packages should drop the finline-gnu89 patch that only m68k uses. I 
think it is there solely for glibc-2.5 (and I don't trust that binary 


Reply to: