Re: Crush 2.0 abandoned

[Prince Riley <wmarketing3@gmail.com>]

Ola Hector,

Thank you for you post. Its a good start down the path of laying out solutions to the issues Neil has raised in his post. 

To help everyone on this list to understand your suggestions, can we do the following:

1. In each area, please specify the issue (please use Neil's item list numbering), itemize the recommended steps, and the scope/make-up of the "deliverable". Also if possible, give us some idea of the people needed and a timeframe.

2. In the areas where you foresee taking a new (improved) approach to what is already being done, please give us some idea of the same things listed above, put also what impact if any such a change might have on other areas in the project.

 As quicly as we possible can, we need to plan and timeline what needs to be done so the list can being to make their contributions.

Thanks again, Hector

Prince

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Prince,

En/na Prince Riley ha escrit:

> 1) Please list the items in  order of important and priority (using
> Neil's item numbers)

[DESIGN & CONCEPT]
IMHO, multiarch is one of the priorities and we should think about
writing an extension to the multiarch specification, so it includes the
cross compiler case.

We also have different ways of doing things in the cross world:
1) Current cross building framework
2) Sysrooted framework
3) Multiarch framework

[TOOLCHAINS]
Fixing and getting cross toolchais into Debian proper is other important
priority (see a Cross Toolchains "Squeeze" Release Goals email).

[AUTOBUILDER]
Another important issue, it is to setup a Debian buildd, which picks a
cross compiler instead native compiler to do builds, then fix and work
all the things in Neil's list.

[PACKAGES]
For Crush 2.0 (before multiarch), *it is not worth it to work on it*,
with current approach, it is too much time consuming (Neil has already
pointed out some of the drawbacks). But it is better to work for Crush 3.0.

But, Neil, what do you think on having a debian/rules which points to
debian/rules.d/$native_rules if DEB_BUILD_ARCH == DEB_HOST_ARCH and
debian/rules.d/$cross_rules if DEB_BUILD_ARCH != DEB_HOST_ARCH?
With this and xcontrol, we might be able to make it possible and easy
for crush 2.0, but as you said it might not worth the time if everything
changes.

[EXTRA]
Another good point to work on, would be to replace perl scripts from
essential packages with some shell scripts.

Cheers,
               -- Héctor Orón