Re: gcc-4.1 cross-build omission
Hello Neil,
Sorry, but i have been very busy lately and I had also some trouble
with my connectivity to the net.
This is a guess, i believe gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu depends on
gcc-4.1-base (it should depend on gcc-4.1-arm-base).
I have just realize that we have gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu-base. I believe
we should have gcc-4.1-base-arm-linux. Am I right?
Regards,
Hector Oron
2006/12/17, Neil Williams <linux@codehelp.co.uk>:
Despite previous attempts, today's gcc-4.1 4.1.1-21 update is again
held back by our crossbuilding toolchain:
$ sudo apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
bind9 bind9-host cpp-4.1 dnsutils g++-4.1 gcc-4.1 gcc-4.1-base
lib32gcc1 libbind9-0 libffi4 libffi4-dev libgcc1 libglib2.0-data
libisc11 libisccc0 libisccfg1 libssp0 libstdc++6 libstdc++6-4.1-dev
linux-image-2.6-amd64
$ sudo apt-get install gcc-4.1
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
cpp-4.1 g++-4.1 gcc-4.1-base lib32gcc1 libffi4 libffi4-dev libgcc1
libssp0 libstdc++6 libstdc++6-4.1-dev
Suggested packages:
gcc-4.1-locales gcc-4.1-doc lib32stdc++6 lib32ssp0 lib32ffi4 libstdc+
+6-4.1-doc Recommended packages:
libmudflap0-dev
The following packages will be REMOVED
g++-4.1-arm-linux-gnu gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu libgcc1-arm-cross libstdc+
+6-4.1-dbg-arm-cross libstdc++6-4.1-dev-arm-cross libstdc+
+6-4.1-pic-arm-cross libstdc++6-arm-cross
The following packages will be upgraded: cpp-4.1 g++-4.1 gcc-4.1
gcc-4.1-base lib32gcc1 libffi4 libffi4-dev libgcc1 libssp0 libstdc++6
libstdc++6-4.1-dev
11 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 7 to remove and 11 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B/8054kB of archives.
After unpacking 33.9MB disk space will be freed.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
Abort.
I can't identify which package is to blame. Is anyone else seeing this?
--
Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Reply to: