Re: emsetup bug
On 2007-02-01 19:10 +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:41:45 -0500
> Jim Heck <jsurf@heckheck.com> wrote:
>
> > I was thinking a way to deal with this would be to modify
> > the check_toolchains() routine to accept a parameter and pass in a
> > preferred version of a toolchain from the cross-compile conf file,
> > with the default being "latest", which would cause the check_toolchain
> > () routine to lookup the latest toolchain.
>
> emdebian-tools is based around whatever is the current default compiler
> version (and other essential toolchain packages) in Debian. Various
> other parts may break with other versions and, personally, I cannot
> support them. Staying in step with Debian is important in Emdebian. You
> are free to maintain your own patches but I don't have time to support
> emdebian-tools using anything except the latest current toolchain in
> the Emdebian tools repository using the current Debian default compiler.
>
> > This would allow the
> > user to get the latest toochain by default but specify a different
> > one if that is what they have installed. I didn't, however, code any
> > of that up yet as a proposed patch. Does anybody think that would be
> > a good idea?
>
> Personally, I'm not keen on supporting this within emdebian-tools. It
> does not fit with the purposes of the current emdebian-tools scripts.
I understand what you are saying, and agree up to a point that the
supported method is 'use the same versions as upstream'. However, I
think three is a lot of merit in letting people use external
toolchains. There are a whole host of reasons why you might need to
use another toolchain (different CPU or FPU options, weird kernels).
There are an awful lot of devices not directly supported by Debian,
but which have kernel ports, and some of those will need older
compiler versions. Simply saying emdebian is no use to all those
people is a bit harsh (at this stage).
It may turn out that things really will only work with 'latest'
toolchain and people will just have to sort it out and make their
compilers work, but in practice it often won't matter much.
So whilst I think it is reasonable for you to say 'I'm not supporting
that', I think if Jim has a sensible patch we should put the option
in, and see if it really causes problems. I suspect I'll need it
myself too.
Wookey
--
Aleph One Ltd, Bottisham, CAMBRIDGE, CB5 9BA, UK Tel +44 (0) 1223 811679
work: http://www.aleph1.co.uk/ play: http://wookware.org/
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Reply to: