On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 10:27 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Hideki Yamane wrote: > > > Okay, but they are using patched gcc and binutils for build it. > > So I guess, first it should be merged to upstream gcc/binutils, then > > be added to firmware git repo, right? > > No, that is not how the firmware-free source package works. It just > ships pre-built firmware and source but doesn't build anything from > source. So it isn't nessecary to care about if the firmware is > buildable at all. So if you patch the source, you will not get a fixed > version of the firmware. Not by running debian/rules, no. > Personally I think this is the wrong way to go about packaging free software. Assuming that you think the right way is to package and use the toolchain for each free firmware project: I don't believe this is allowed in Debian, nor do I have time for that. But if you want to fight that battle, you are welcome, and I'll be happy to build firmware-free using those packages. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The obvious mathematical breakthrough [to break modern encryption] would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers. - Bill Gates
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part