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

Re: Packages in need of porting

Roland Fehrenbacher <rf@q-leap.de> writes:

> >>>>> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
>     Goswin> Hi, out of the base packages the following fail to build at the
>     Goswin> moment:
>     Goswin>  acl-2.2.21                          #groff           #ppp
>     Goswin>  bind9-9.2.3                          ifupdown-0.6.4  #python2.3
>     Goswin>  build-essential-10                  #libpcap         #rsync
>     Goswin> #cyrus-sasl2                         #lilo            #screen
>     Goswin> #db3                                 #modconf         #shadow
>     Goswin> #db4.0                               #newt            #sudo
>     Goswin> #db4.1                                nvi-1.79        #tar
>     Goswin> #devmapper                           #opencdk8        #tasksel
>     Goswin>  e2fsprogs-1.34+1.35-WIP-2003.08.21  #openldap2        tcp-wrappers-7.6-ipv6.1
>     Goswin> #fdutils                             #openssh          util-linux-2.12
>     Goswin> #gnutls7                             #pam             #zsh
> Hi,
> against what glibc package are you trying to compile? And how is the
> autobuilder managing the lib/lib64 issue? What compiler package are you

All alioth debs. The autobuilder is ignoring the lib/lib64 completly.
I will a check for 64 bit files in /lib or /usr/lib tomorrow to catch
libs without 64bit patches I think. Should be easy to wrap dpkg-deb or

The autobuilder is currently just a shell script,

The real one is still missing too many debs.

> using? I have working gcc 3.3.2 biarch packages also with the fortran problem
> solved (missing 64bit libfrtbegin.a), if there is interest.

Drop the source into /incoming/sid-i386/. You compile gcc with
"linux32 dpkg-buildpackage", right?

> I was looking at building 2.3.2.ds1-10 with biarch support, however the Debian
> build mechanism has completely changed so it was close to impossible to apply
> the current biarch patches from the recent packages on alioth. Is anybody
> looking into adding biarch support for the new build scheme, or shall we stay
> with the current version of the glibc amd64 packages (note we still have the
> "export _POSIX2_VERSION=199209" problem in there). The old biarch3 package
> built fine with my setup.

I export that in the autobuilder to avoid the problem during build. I
think updating the is not a high priority for now. Getting more of the
base libraries (and then the binaries too) to compiled 64 Bit flavours
is more important.


Reply to: