Re: Please reenable GCJ on mips
Hi,
* Nathanael Nerode (neroden@twcny.rr.com) [051007 04:42]:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > If
> > you think, that availability of compilers on some architectures
> > should be release criterium, please bring that up with the release
> > team first.
> That's not at all what I think.
>
> I think that if there are known binutils bugs for your architecture, which
> supposedly prevent the build of multiple packages --
> /either/ forwarding them upstream
> /or/ fixing them if they're Debian-specific
> /or/ closing them if they're bogus
> within a reasonable amount of time (less than a year)
> should be a requirement for a port to be considered.
Actually, there is one criterion missing: Does this bug really hurt us
bad (enough)? And my current answer to this is no, but of course, you
might want to persuade me. :)
My current understanding of this bug is that mips Inc. is working on a
new abi that will fix this (and other) issues way better than the
current xgot-vs-multigot-way allows us to do. There was some discussion
between Thiemo, someone from mips, Matthias Klose (doko) and me on the
porters meeting in Oldenburg, and I'm quite optimistic that it's on
a good way. However, making such a massive change is not something that
can be done very fast.
So, I think we can say that this bug is even forwarded to upstream, as
mips Inc is aware of it and working on a fix.
Cheers,
Andi
Reply to: