What else needs to know about armhf?
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 03:29:05PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 02:41:32PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > >> If you ask me, I would say that providing a magic for file(1) as I said
> > >> on debian-arm would be more useful that NMUing a few hanging fruits.
> > Point being: instead of spending time on low hanging fruits the tool chain
> > should be adapted.
> Well, you're simply wrong here. Work is progressing on having dpkg handle
> armhf, and that is entirely orthogonal to any question of distinguishing
> armhf and armel ELF objects at the binary level. Having the toolchain
> identify the floating-point ABI in the ELF header is a valid wishlist
> request that would be useful for more than lintian, but it's not relevant to
> bootstrapping the port.
In that tone, I don't look kindly upon NMUs for autotools-dev to add
support for new archs, as upstream is usually quite snappy. Instead, I
commit to uploading an updated package shortly after I am made aware
that packaging a new upstream snapshot is needed for whatever reason.
So, if armhf support is needed in config.sub/config.guess for
autoconf/automake use, either send ASAP a patch to GNU config upstream,
or file a bug with the patch against autotools-dev which I will forward
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot