[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Cross toolchain status and update

On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 13:30 +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 06:30:35PM +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
> Can somebody please consider applying the attached patchlet?

I would but empath is stalled right now - do you find it useful? (Did it
even work?) Do you want to take it on? (Did it take down your system as
it has done with mine before now?)

> I didn't have libapt-pkg-dev installed but this wasn't detected properly
> (by bailing out). Attached trivial patch fixes this

What other results did you get once the patch was applied?

I stopped working on empath over a year ago because it just seemed to be
getting into ever decreasing circles of recursive madness. debtree is a
possible alternative:


I used that to create some dependency graphs to help me through the Gtk+


If you can get empath to assert and maintain control over the dependency
chain in Debian (maybe take a look at the mathematics in edos-debcheck),
then maybe you could complete empath. I no longer have the time or, TBH,
the itch.

empath is a great idea but the current implementation sucks (and I wrote
it!). I was actually considering moving it out of "current" Emdebian SVN
and into the graveyard of "superseded" but it hasn't actually been
superseded by anything, it just isn't ready.

The problem with empath is that by the time you work out how to solve
the problem in the code, you've also solved the actual problem of
determining the path through the dependencies and you don't need the
program anymore.

Only one person needs the info from empath - the first person building
the package set. Once the first set is built, identifying the gaps and
updating the packages can be done in any sequence.

My problem is that I devised the path for Emdebian ARM in a piecemeal
fashion and I don't have a log of the sequence that I used - other than
the fact that I did use those dependency graphs.

(Not sure if that helps, actually. Sorry.)


Neil Williams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: