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

Re: Need build for xulrunner

On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 08:56:34PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> * To be able to cross-build packages, a cross-toolchain has to be
>   installed. There are no prebuilt packages for this, you need to build
>   them yourselves.

This should not be an issue, we could automate building new
crosstoolchains anytime any of the component package gets updated.
Apart from not being sprinkled with Holy Debian Chicken Pee, 
autobuilt crosscompilers should not be any more buggy than
autobuilt native toolchains.

> * Debian build-dependencies do not distinguish between stuff that's
>   needed because you need to run it, and stuff that's needed because you
>   need the .so or .a file, or some (possibly architecture-specific)
>   header files.

This is tricky. If only a very small set of packages are planned to
be crosscompiled, it can be implemented by managing the list by hand.
The all-singing-all-dancing-aids-curing multiarch would bring arch:all
arch:any style dependencies, but it appears to materialize slowly..

> * Cross-building packages makes it rather troublesome to do test suites,
>   since you can't run target code on the compile host.

This is the most compelling reason to keep building nativelly. 
xulrunner itself does not seem to have testsuite, but still building 
xulrunner nativelly lets us know that atleast the compiler and other 
binaries executed during the build are working properly. 

> Of course, that doesn't mean you shouldn't do cross-compiled packages at
> all; and if you can somehow guarantee the quality of the compiled code,
> then by all means, go for it.

The solution would be ability to run testsuites separatly from
buildtime. AutomatedTesting[1] seems to plan to provide the means 
for that, and openis chance for more systematic regression testing.

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/02/msg00035.html

Reply to: