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

Re: armhf toolchain is broken in the repository




On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> wrote:
On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 22:40:52 -0800 (PST)
Patrik Kluba <kpajko79@gmail.com> wrote:

> Both the 4.6 and 4.7 toolchains are broken for amd64 in the
> http://www.emdebian.org/debian/ repository for several days now. While the
> amd64 versions are at 4.6.3-8 and 4.7.1-3, the i386 versions got upgraded to
> 4.6.3-12 and 4.7.2-4. The problem is that when the i386 versions got merged,
> the older version of architecture independent packages got disappeared
> somehow. For example, there's no
> libstdc++6-4.6-dev-armhf-cross_4.6.3-8_all.deb just
> libstdc++6-4.6-dev-armhf-cross_4.6.3-12_all.deb

-cross packages need to be updated using xapt and then kept in line
from time to time. -cross packages are Architecture: all and this
won't change because the -cross method is outdated and needs to be
replaced by MultiArch.


That does not work. xapt fails to find the package with the specified version (but it works with the latest version). I have tried to generate libstdc++6-4.7-armhf-cross_4.7.1-7_all.deb with it by doing:

xapt -a armhf -b -m libstdc++6=4.7.1-7

The response was:

E: Version '4.7.1-7' for 'libstdc++6' was not found

I have checked the Packages file fetched by xapt, and it indeed does not reference that version. However the armhf package can be downloaded from the repository.

http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-4.7/libstdc++6_4.7.1-7_armhf.deb

Maybe that's the cause the correct dependency is missing from the emdebian repository. I'm not very acquainted with the structure of the Packages file, can it reference multiple versions of a package? If not, the only fix could be getting the armhf toolchain in sync with the armel toolchain. Aren't they built at the same time?

By the way, following http://wiki.debian.org/BuildingCrossCompilers I have successfully built the latest 4.6 and 4.7 toolchains, and they compiled cleanly.

Regards,
Patrik

Reply to: