On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 21:08:48 +0000 Wookey <wookey@aleph1.co.uk> wrote: > 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. OK. All the relevant checks take place in emsetup and the other scripts should be fairly version-neutral - providing that the versions of dpkg-cross, apt-cross and the scripts themselves are up to date. Apart from the toolchain, most of the setup is just making apt-cross happy. > 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). I just don't want to get a bunch of bug reports that only apply using "unsupported" kernels or toolchains. It makes it almost impossible to understand the bug reports - this is already an unavoidable issue with dpkg-cross. > 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. It may simply be necessary to *not* use 'emsetup' if the toolchain is unsupported - I'm not sure if Jim's proposed method will work out but I'll take a look at patches that have a neutral effect on the supported usage. Jim: please could you only post/submit diff's or patches in -u format? It's much easier to read. The diff you posted in your reply would break other configurations horribly, if I've read it correctly. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpRQT3uPfH8m.pgp
Description: PGP signature