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

Re: How handle Architecture when package is restricted/limited to only some archs?

Hi Don Armstrong and all,

On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 11:51:08PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2009, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > tuxcmd is currently by upsteam "restricted" to the Architectures i386
> > and x86_64. [1]. As suggested in a previous thread I had put 
> > 	
> > 	Architecture: any
> > 
> > in the control file, and now I'm having the following situation: On
> > powerpc all Build-Depends are satisfied, and also the package get's
> > build, but tuxcmd will not work at all on this architecture.
> Why not? There's nothing obvious about tuxcmd that makes it only
> suitable for i386 and amd64. If it doesn't work properly on archs
> other than i386 and amd64, that sounds like bugs that should be fixed
> (likely resulting from poor coding practices on the part of upstream.)

I got recently now also an answer from upstram author on this
restricted support on only little endian architectures. It is:

> yes, PowerPC port is currently broken. FreePascal has very bad support for
> different endianity, mostly from the memory management point of view. I had
> partial success some time ago on an old iBook G3 though, no plugins.
> FreePascal internally allocates memory from heap (most probably), but from
> different memory area than malloc does. It also adds few bytes control
> information and returns pointer with offset of few bytes, which obviously
> cannot be used with standard libc allocator calls. I had no luck with FPC
> cmem unit either which basically uses malloc, things went even worse.
> Spending so much time on fixing things which are broken from the beginning
> is unproductive and there are different, more important areas which I want
> to focus on first. Tux Commander could use complete rewrite to pure C, but
> that's fulltime work for several months. Volunteers are welcome of course.
> Forgot to mention that I intentionally disabled PPC archs in the Fedora
> package. I can only support i386 and x86_64 at the moment.

There should be some solution, but I do not know if it is really good
to (temporarly) do in the next upload the restriction for Architecture
to only little endian archs.

Kind regards, and thanks for any further suggestions

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: