Re: Can we upload binaries using libc6 to hamm yet?

[Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>]

> I have to say I agree with david. I'd rather have a gcc package,
> providing the standard gcc front-end under a different name using two
> shellscripts gcc-libc5 and gcc-libc6 at installation time one of them
> gets linked to gcc according to the installers choice.
> The library locations should be : libc6 as standard, libc5 as
> alternative. Thus people wouldn't even know that the standard libs
> have changed using gcc-libc5 while the maintainer (and anyone else
> wanting to) could use the new libs with gcc-libc6.
> This is _far_ less work than providing packages without end, generates
> less confusion and fixes the path structure on a debian system.

How about making /usr/bin/gcc be a shell script that takes an option (something like --libc5 or --libc6) to force selection, with the default being the libc version that is installed in /lib.
That way normal users don't have to worry about it, and people that want to just use the option.
This would also allow us to have the /usr/bin/gcc script check what was installed and generate messages along the lines of:

  ERROR: Debian package libc5-dev is needed to compile libc5 binaries on
         libc6 based systems.  Please install it and try again.

This is the way you are supposed to do cross-compilation under gcc isn't it ? With the /usr/bin/gcc script setting up the options and calling the real gcc which is somewhere like /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/2.7.2.1 or whatever.

Cheers, Phil.



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .