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

Re: Stop Debian/FreeBSD

On Sun, Nov 21, 1999 at 12:35:11AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> (1) FreeBSD's support for running linux binaries needs to be enhanced.
> If done, that reduces the scope of the problem.  If not done the problem
> is rather nasty.  [I understand that dpkg and bash have problems running
> under this emulation.]
> As I understand it, what's missing is support for a few currently 
> unimplemented syscall.

syscalls are a different issue. Software using syscalls can be declared
as such, and only installed on systems that provide such syscalls or an

Compatibility at a library API level is not a problem for the Hurd, syscalls
are, as well as use of the proc fs.

Of course, seperation at this level is not possible at all with the Debian
architecture scheme. I often explained how Depends: could solve this
problem with virtual packages, but this would be of course a bit more
complicated to implement :)

But what we can do is to declare packages as linux-any if syscalls or procfs
are used.
> If not done, a lot more work is going to have to go into working around
> this situation.

Replacing Architectures with Dependencies is by no means a work around, it
is a workable and clean solution. Neither is introducing linux-any etc.
Unfortunately the latter will not solve the situation completely with
regards to emulation.
> (2) Once that emulation is reasonably complete -- such that any remaining
> problems are obviously kernel related -- the simple thing to do is make
> the freebsd kernel depend on (or recommend, for optional/extra/non-us
> packages) any relevant freebsd specific packages.
> Hopefully, there won't be too many unessential packages pulled in using
> such a scheme.

I think you are thinking the wrong way about it. Dependencies are
top-bottom, not bottom-up.

> It's true that brute force workarounds should be replaced with something
> more elegant.  And I hope that the hurd and freebsd people can come up
> with such a thing.

I can come up with a scheme, but not implement it. Then there is the
blockade of the ftp admins, mirror admins, and the Debian policy group.
That's too much hassle for me to go through for me, especially as I can't
provide a finished and ready-to-use implementation.

The scheme I have in mind would work bets with the package pool idea.

Please see http://www.debian.org/~brinkmd/arch-handling.txt
it's a bit old, but the core reflects still my idea.


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server 
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org    for public PGP Key 
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de,     marcus@gnu.org    PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/       brinkmd@debian.org

Reply to: