Re: Updated maint-guide contents, question on style -- ELF/compiled language
On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 10:01:14PM +0100, Justin B Rye wrote:
> But here are typofixes anyway:
>
> > + Line 10 describes the CPU architectures the binary package can be
> > + compiled for. This value are usually one of the following depending
> is
> > + on the type of the binary package.
> > + <footnote><para>See
> > + <ulink url="http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Architecture";>Debian Policy Manua 5.6.8 "Architecture"</ulink>
> > + for exact details.
> > + </para></footnote>
> > + * <literal>Architecture: any</literal>
> > + - The geneated binary package is architecture dependent one
> ^r is an
> > + usually from compiler languages.
> in a compiled language.
> > + * <literal>Architecture: all</literal>
> > + - The generated binary package is architecture independent one
> is an
> > + usually generated from interpreter languages or
> > + consisting of text or graphic data.
>
> usually consisting of text, images, or scripts in an interpreted language
> > +
> > + We leave line 10 as is since this is written in the C language.
> in C.
> > + dpkg-gencontrol(1) will fill in the appropriate CPU architecture
> architecture
> > + value for any machine this source package gets compiled on.
After commiting and reading this, I found this to be awkward.
There is no "compiled language". I know "compiled binary code" from
"compiler languages" such as C. Then I realize, we use ELF these days
and it is not exactly machine code (aout) itself. Linker makes ELF
binary into machine code. Thus I updated related section with "ELF".
Please see all the location with "ELF" or "compile" around here.
Regards,
Osamu
Reply to: