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

Re: appropriate architectures for packages



Hi,

On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 11:35:08PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:

> wxgtk and the boost libraries.  This is a very time intensive package to 
> compile and it has been known to hang some of the buildds for many many 
> minutes, resulting in a failed build.  This begs the question of whether 

On the technical side, you can look at Camm Maguire's way to
workaround this problem for axiom (by issuing regular ticks so that
the build daemon do not think the build is frozen).

http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/a/axiom/axiom_20050901-6.diff.gz

and precisely:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+build-stamp: configure-stamp debian/patches_applied
+	dh_testdir
+
+#	[ "$(NO_SAVE_SYS)" = "" ] || \
+#		( mkdir -p $(CURDIR)/mnt/linux/algebra && cp debian/*aase mnt/linux/algebra/ )
+
+	export AXIOM=$(CURDIR)/mnt/linux ; \
+	export PATH=$$AXIOM/bin:$$PATH ; \
+	while sleep 1800 ; do echo tick; done & j=$$!; \
+	$(MAKE) PASS1=t ; i=$$? ; \
+	kill $$j || true ; exit $$i
+
+	find -name "*.lsp" -exec touch {} \;
+	find -name "*.lisp" -exec touch {} \;
+
+	export AXIOM=$(CURDIR)/mnt/linux ; \
+	export PATH=$$AXIOM/bin:$$PATH ; \
+	while sleep 1800 ; do echo tick; done & j=$$!; \
+	$(MAKE)  ; i=$$? ; \
+	kill $$j || true ; exit $$i
+

...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

> I am tempted to just not even bother having the buildds try to build for 
> these architectures because the likelihood that someone will ever actually 
> _use_ fityk is vanishingly small even though it is possible to do so (in 
> principle).  However, I feel a bit guilty about excluding them.

On the `political' side, I think it is to the porters to decide
whether they want to support the software, so you might ask to the
debian-m68k and such lists.

> At what point does it make no sense to expend a lot of effort to build a 
> package on architectures where the are not likely to be used (or even 
> usable)?  Just because it _can_ be built on a particular architecture 
> does it _always_ make sense to do so?

The answer is also in your hands. Does it require too much effort to you?

Best regards,
Frédéric Lehobey



Reply to: