Re: jessie for x32
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 03:32:12PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 03:20:46PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 03:56:20AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > Here's some news about the x32 port. I'm trying a different approach:
> > > instead of using only packages uploaded by their {,non-}maintainers, as on
> > > ftp.debian-ports.org which tracks unstable, I'm using a separate repository
> > > on ftp.debian-x32.org that includes packages with porting patches applied.
> > > That is, 54 sourceful uploads that unblock further 1427 source packages.
> >
> > Why not use the infrastructure already available in debian-ports.org for
> > the same purpose? It is expected that packages in debian-ports sometimes
> > need patches, and this is perfectly reasonable...
>
> There's an "unreleased" suite, but it's used only for build dependencies
> for bootstrap, and is not supposed to be installed by users.
That's not what I've been told. For the m68k port, at some point, we
actually had glibc in unreleased.
The problem is that it is difficult to install and/or use from d-i,
since d-i cannot install from multiple suites; so if you need to patch
packages in the base system or in d-i itself, then unreleased isn't
ideal. Other than that though, it should Just Work(TM).
(Of course, there's nothing wrong, per se, with using a separate
repository if you think that's easier. It's just that it seems a bit of
a waste)
--
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer
-- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26
Reply to: