Re: Wrong Architecture for openhackware
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:48:45AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:47:53 +0100, Roland Stigge wrote:
> > Again, I don't agree here (backed by p2): The package is wrong if it
> > asserts that it's "Architecture: all". It contains powerpc specific
> > stuff and can only be built on (i.e. for) that architecture. Therefore,
> > it should be "Architecture: powerpc".
>
> Yes, ideally, to be pedantically correct, we would either have
> powerpc (or other) cross-toolchains on the archive,
At the first [1] glance, it appears that all of these packages are happy
with nothing but gcc/binutils, so bare-bones crosschains wouldn't take too
much space.
> or we'd have
> Multiarch support and the package could be arch:powerpc and would be
> possible to install on other arches. But this is not possible right
> now, so consider this wontfix.
Also, it would be great if we had packaged kernels (even minimal) for all
arches. Without them, tools like qemubuilder take a long session of hunting
for docs and files to set up.
A static kernel without useless drivers takes 1-2MB, that's a low price for
the convenience.
[1]. A _brief_ glance, so don't shoot me if I missed something big.
--
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.
Reply to: