Re: Seeking other archs to build packages on
James Troup <J.J.Troup@scm.brad.ac.uk> writes:
> Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
>
> > Apart from that, you could also crosscompile.
>
> Uh, no. Please do not upload untested cross-compiled code. Untested
> stuff is the most likely to break and cross compilation is often
> dodgy. There are maintainers for the non-i386 architectures who will
> compile all packages, which can be compiled, sooner or later. If you
> want to help us, a) ensure your package builds from a fresh source
> tree, and b) fix the bugs we file about packages which won't build
> from source[2]. People who don't own and can't access non-i386
> machines producing non-i386 debs are in general, going to cause
> trouble[1], not help. Even on the slowest architectures, it's the
> broken packages holding us back, not the number of compilable
> packages.
>
> [1] There are of course, some exceptions to this, e.g. non-free
> pre-compiled binaries.
>
> [2] There was until recently still #3xxx era bugs filed by previous
> m68k maintainers about source packages being unbuildable from source.
> I think Dirk may have fixed the last with his upload of autopgp, I
> can't check right now though (nameserver problems).
Of cause the crosscompiled packages should be tested, but its easier
for people to test the thing, than to compile and test it.
Another point in favour of crosscompiling is, that some errors will
occur that don´t occur on i386. *Thinking about those smart i486
optimisations flags that fail on non-i386*
A crosscompiled package could go to experimental and only after
testing to unstable.
May the Source be with you.
Mrvn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: