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

Re: on bootstrapping ports (was: Re: Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info))



Am 27.10.2013 16:06, schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> Johannes Schauer wrote:
>> Indeed, none of the Type 1 Self-Cycles are needed to bootstrap the core of
>> Debian. Unfortunately though, most of the Type 2 Self-Cycles are. You will 
> find
>> many surprising (at least to me) examples in the section of "Type 2
>> Self-Cycles" under the above link.
> 
> On the other hand, if you count Build-Depends-Indep and Architecture: all 
> packages as part of what you want to bootstrap, then gnat-4.6 does get pulled 
> in...
> 
> gzip Build-Depends-Indep: mingw-w64
> mingw-w64 Build-Depends: gcc-mingw-w64-{i686,x86_64}
> gcc-mingw-w64 Build-Depends: gnat-4.6
> 
> (And also, you have the issue that gcc-4.8 Build-Depends on libantlr-java and 
> libecj-java, whose builds require either gcj-4.8 from the same source package, 
> or openjdk-7-jdk which also Build-Depends on ecj.)
> 
> I realize that these sorts of issues aren't as important for the practical 
> problem of bootstrapping a new port; but ideally, from a philosophical point 
> of view we should be able to bootstrap all our packages.  (To be honest, the 
> Java packages are such a tangled mess that I've given up on trying to 
> bootstrap that part of the archive for now -- and many of those do get pulled 
> into the minimal set of ca. 1473 source packages I get with my criteria.)

well, please can we concentrate on practical issues first, then come back to the
philosopicals again?   With recent binary-indep packages you just cross-build
gcc-4.8 including java.  Problem solved.  I never did see a bug report about the
"tangled mess" in the java packages, so I'll just ignore that.  gcj and openjdk
were one of the easier parts for the AArch64 bootstrap.

  Matthias


Reply to: