[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Cross compiler ITP (armel)



On 22.03.2011 12:54, Mark Hymers wrote:
> On Mon, 14, Mar, 2011 at 02:04:30PM +0000, Hector Oron spoke thus..
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2009/11/2 Mark Hymers <mhy@debian.org>:
>>> On Mon, 02, Nov, 2009 at 12:43:42PM +0000, Philipp Kern spoke thus..
>>>> Of course it is a sane approach but very special care needs to be taken when
>>>> releasing to ensure GPL compliance.  So what we should get is support in the
>>>> toolchain to declare against what source package the upload was built to
>>>> keep that around.
> 
> Ok, I'm only going to comment on this part.  This is nearly implemented
> and should be there by the end of the day (I need to run up some test
> packages to work with).
> 
> The current design is the Binary packages can contain an additional
> control field: Built-Using.
> 
> The specification of this field is that it *must* contain only strict
> version dependencies and these must be to source packages.  I.e.
> 
> Built-Using: gcc-4.5 (= 4.5.2-5)
> 
> If dak can't parse this field, or the source versions which are declared
> are not present when the binary package is uploaded, it will reject the
> upload.  If it can parse and find these dependencies, it stores them in
> an extra table in projectb which prevents us from throwing away the
> relevant source files until these binaries no longer exist anywhere in
> the archive, the same way as we handle it for the normal source case.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure where this should be documented, it's not really a
> policy thing as it's specific to the archive.  Suggestions welcome.
> We'll obviously include it in the minutes to d-d-a at the end of the
> meeting (the main people this should be used by, as far as I know are
> cross-compiler builders and the d-i and kernel-wedge people).

that would be too strict for e.g. gcj-4.5

Built-Using: gcc-4.5 (>= 4.5.2-1~), gcc-4.5 (<< 4.5.3)

would be correct, however this already can be expressed in the build
dependencies, so I assume packages like gcj-4.x, gdc-4.x, gnat-4.x don't need to
be changed.

  Matthias


Reply to: