Re: Policy changes which completely break apt-cross
My recommendation for a solution is to teach pbuilder how to resolve
cross dependencies and stop installing -cross packages outside a
chroot. We tried it, it is/was painful - let's learn the lesson, not
repeat previous mistakes.
How would this affect the continued availability of apt-cross and
dpkg-cross? I'd hate to see them (or their functionality outside of
pbuilder) go away completely, since I use them to manually build cross
toolchains based on a modification of the method described here
http://wiki.debian.org/EmdebianToolchain under the heading 'Build your
own from sources'. I do this instead of using the pre-packaged
toolchains or emchain, since I need to make the toolchains standalone
for use outside of a Debian environment, using an alternate prefix so
that they compile for use and install under /opt/.. instead of /usr/..
This is in support of a generic build environment for sofware that will
run on my target Debian system, but which is not itself a Debian
package. The generic build system, for reasons beyond my control, is
not itself a Debian environment, and so the alternate prefix is
necessary and useful.
I get great utility from the excellent Debian cross compiler packages,
but my need to support them with alternate build prefix means that I
need to make some manual changes to the rules makefiles of the binutils
and gcc packages prior to compilation. These changes turn out in fact
to be fairly trivial and generic, simply some replacement of hardcoded
'/usr' paths with a prefix variable that is centrally defined. I'd be
happy to post the diffs here and to submit them upstream in the
appropriate manner if they could be of use to people beyond myself. If
I were to do this, should I file a wishlist bug against binutils and gcc
Debian packages with the patches?