Fate of binutils-m68k-palmos-coff
Hi,
I sent this inquiry to the current maintainer and the wnpp maintainer
but haven't yet received any reply, so I thought I'd ask here.
In a nutshell, the situation is this: There is a package called
binutils-m68k-palmos-coff that is part of a cross-compiler to compile
programs to run on a PalmPilot. However, by itself it is largely
useless. One also need the gcc and gdb packages. However,
gcc-m68k-palmos-coff and gdb-m68k-palmos-coff are both orphaned, and
the binutils-m68k-palmos-coff is outdated. (One actually needs pilrc
as well, but that is from a separate source tree and not at issue
here.)
So, last weekend I packaged up prc-tools (which containcs the
m68k-palmos-coff of all three of those programs, as in the upstream
version). It has newer binutils than the binutils-m68k-palmos-coff
package. prc-tools properly conflicts, replaces, and provides the
older packages.
This in all is a Good Thing since gcc-m68k-palmos-coff and
gdb-m68k-palmos-coff are dropped, and without gcc at least,
binutils-m68k-palmos-coff is pretty well useless. So, since we have
newer, working versions of all these tools, should
binutils-m68k-palmos-coff be removed?
This is the question I asked its maintainer but haven't heard back
yet. My reccommendation would be to remove
binutils-m68k-palmos-coff. In any case, the gcc and gdb
m68k-palmos-coff packages can be removed from the wnpp list since
working versions now exist.
John
--
John Goerzen Linux, Unix consulting & programming jgoerzen@complete.org |
Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade) www.debian.org |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the Air Capitol Linux Users Group on the web at http://www.aclug.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: