Re: arm eabi port, patches
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 23:07:28 +0000, Wookey wrote:
> On 2007-02-22 18:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Well spotted. That is indeed the offending bit. dpkg-architecture now seems
> to give the right answers.
> That has revealed that dpkg-cross needed armel support, which I've done,
> but that raises some questions about definitive arch-names, and
> dpkg-architecture -L. I'll post another mail about that.
I think the correct thing to do is to merge dpkg-cross into dpkg
itself, and I'm willing to start discussing what's needed from dpkg
side to start incrementaly merging the functionality. Nikita, Neil?
> And that reveals some problems in the existing gcc-4.1-4.1.1ds2 patch
> (armel/armeb are used as a CPU name in rules.def, but they aren't so
> the wrong things try to get built). I've fixed that, and will post
> all three patches once a finished cross-compiler pops out with no
> further probs.
Yeah the cpu name should not change with the port name. ;)
As I told Riku I think the binutils patch might be wrong as well, but
I've not had the time to review it properly.
> > Unfortunately I'll not go to FOSDEM this year.
> There was no Lennert either (SFAICS). Despite these lacks it was still
That's what I've heard. =)