Re: ARMv4-support in armel/squeeze?
> you have to bear in mind that "future porting" *used* to be very
> uncommon an occurrence (as if doing it 14 times is "uncommon")
> but with the massive explosion in compiler options for ARM processors
> alone, the process of "porting" now becomes a massive headache.
Really? AFAIK the only really interesting option (soft vs. hard float ABI) has
already been done. I guess we might want a big-endian port eventually, but
all the other options are just optimizations and fully binary compatible with
the current ports. i.e. you can start from a full armel/armhf system and
incrementally rebuild optimized packages from there. No reason to bootstrap
from scratch. The real problem is that dpkg can't handle multiple variants of
the same package for the same architecture. Worst case you invent a "new"
port and --force-architecture install the armel packages.
Cross-compiling a base system from scratch may still be an interesting
facility. However if you're doing that then IMO it's also reasonable to want
to cross compile everything. I don't believe bootstrapping of new ports is
sufficient justification for this. I'd expect that any vaguely automated
system for such builds would bitrot rapidly, and require significant