Re: Why are we cross-compiling Debian?
On 12/1/06, Martin Guy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
crufty existing effort in the minimalisation department, the most
profitable efforts would be to modify Debian itself, rather than
propose yet another cut-down Debian-alike in the following directions:
Yet another? Point me at least two working, non bit-rot, ones.
- continue splitting existing packages into foo and foo-doc, as has
already happened to a lot of them. This reduces arch-dep build
dependencies and executable package bulk in one go.
Which is an enermous and not really needed (for Debian, that is) effort.
An embedded system does not need *any* documentation on the storage,
while a Debian package may happily be policy compliant with a bunch of
This whole discussion is pointless.
Debian packages are cross-compiled for a reason -- it's not that many
people out there have access to a beowulf cluster of ARMs. Ever
wondered how much time it takes a Debian arm buildd to compile gcc
suite? Days. If you modify a toolchain yourself, do you really wish
to spend 49 hours whistling around your netwinder just to find out it
generates broken code and you need another patch?
And Debian embedded forks are also for a reason. Nobody in Debian,
besides very (*very*) few people, cares about embedded usage -- and
benefits of Debian-likeliness in embedded world are appreciated, trust