Re: RFS: xburst-tools
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> This part was my doing, sorry. It should be possible to build these
> on mipsel (and they should probably be split out to an arch-all
> package anyway), but that makes it difficult for people without access
> to a non-pocket-sized MIPS machine to test the build process. From
>
> http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?sortby=architecture&sortorder=asc
>
> I infer that there is not even a mipsel porterbox available to DDs.
Seems that is the case, things are improving though:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/04/msg00010.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/05/msg00005.html
A temporary solution to this would be to find a sponsor with a Debian
mips/mipsel install on MIPS hardware. Some pointers to possible places
to find such people can be found here (page needs updating btw):
http://www.debian.org/ports/mips/
Alternatively get sharism.cc to donate/lend a Ben NanoNote to some
willing person. I imagine
> Would the cross-compiled version would be a candidate for contrib?
I think yes. I assume this woud be a source package that build-depends
on the gcc MIPS cross compiler package generated by the new buildcross
package in unstable.
> The correct long-term solution, of course, is to get gcc-mips into
> Debian. Anyone with ideas about how to make that happen?
One option is to update the gcc-X.Y source packages to build
gcc-X.Y-mips cross-compiler packages on i386/amd64. This means a lot
of extra buildd and maintainer build time.
The approach taken by gcc-mingw32 (cross-compiler for Windows 32-bit
and 64-bit) seems to be to duplicate the gcc source code.
Something that may be possible down the track, once the Debian archive
can support source package synchronisation (for license compliance),
is to create gcc-X.Y-mips source packages that build-depend on
gcc-X.Y-source and build and ship a cross-compilers from them.
> The source package is based on the upstream xburst-tools repository;
> it probably should be split into separate packages for qiboot, xbboot,
> usbboot, and so on, since they do not depend at build-time or run-time
> on one another. It is not my impression that these have been split
> already.
Sounds good to me.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: