Michael K. Edwards wrote:
If we could all share the same source packages and a tool set with the same calling conventions, we'd be very far in the direction of what LCC wishes to achieve. The fact is that Debian would have to stop there for most of its architectures, simply because most of our architectures are not in common with the rest of LCC.Fixing ABI forks, and articulating best known practices about managing ABI evolution going forward, that's a good idea. Building an open source test kit that exercises the shared ABIs, validating that the test kit builds substantially the same on each distro, and helping ISVs resolve issues that the test kit missed (and add them as new test cases), that's even better. But if two competent packagers, working on different distros, can't get the same ABI out of the same source code, then upstream's build procedures are badly broken -- and I don't want that papered over by passing binaries around!
I think it would be great to get this far. At that point we could decide if there is any purpose in using the same compile as other folks.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature