Re: dpkg-architecture adaptations for e.g. uclibc and ABIs
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Pjotr Kourzanov <peter.kourzanov@xs4all.nl> writes:
>
>> Updated patch can be found here:
>>
>> http://www.xs4all.nl/~kurzanov/debian/patches/dpkg-1.13.16-all-1.patch.
>>
>> Besides allowing CPU-uclibc architectures it also adds:
>>
>> 1. Specific ARM families armv4,armv5te,strongarm and xscale
>> 2. ARM variations such as VFP and softfloat (old ABI)
>> 3. EABI suffix for linux, linux-uclibc, hurd and hurd-uclibc
>> (last two are rather fictional though;-)
>
> What about mips O32, N32 and N64 ABIs? Can they be differentiated with
> that method too?
Yes, I suppose they could. What I did for arm-eabi before armel was chosen
is to add linux-eabi and linux-uclibc-eabi to ostable. The rest comes sort
of automatically because of (.*) in split_debian from dpkg-architecture.
We do need a way still to prohibit certain combinations (eabi for MIPS,
O32, N32 and N64 for ARM)... Maybe an abitable besides ostable and cputable
would suffice with content such as:
linux-i386(-uclibc)?
linux-arm(-uclibc)?(-eabi)?
linux-mips(el)?(-[on]32|-n64)?
>
> MfG
> Goswin
>
Reply to: