RE: Where's make?
> However, libc5.4 is not available for SPARC. There is only a
libc5.3.12.
> > Davide Barbieri tried to merge patches for libc5.4 into this 5.3.12
> with no
> > success. Maybe you have more skills to do it.
> > But I think it's better to deal with 5.3.12 for old stuff and work
> on glibc-2
> > now. I'm working on a glibc package but I have some pbs to build
> it.
>
> *nod*, I did have a brief crack at it, but it's
> also beyond my skills - libc6 looks inherently
> more portable, and I also would prefer effort to
> be spent on re-integrating sparc patches to libc
> into the main source tree.
>
> > Some of this stuff is already ported: dpkg*, libdb1, libgdbm, flex.
> > They are available in Debian under hamm/hamm/binary-sparc/...
> > I've also made available other packages at lix.polytechnique.fr
> under
> > /pub/Linux/debian/sparc/bo/experimental-sparc (make, m4, ppp,
> sendmail,
> > deliver, file, kermit) but I don't remember why I didn't move them
> to hamm.
> > Surely because some files are missing like documentation, ...
>
> Given that it's almost impossible to do any work
> on debian-sparc without these packages, perhaps we
> need a centralised site and mirrors for these packages,
> and also to update pointers on the debian-sparc web
> site to indicate the location of such?
>
> > Now, I'd rather want not to upload any package you have linked with
> libc5 but
> > were already moved to libc6 in other ports. We have to keep package
> numbers
> > in sync with other architectures and we can't provide 2 packages
> (one linked
> > with libc5 and the other w/ libc6) with the same release number. In
> this
>
> *nod*, I can see the problem - but by the same token,
> I'd like to put together private use development and
> production sets, so that (a) other developers can
> contribute to the effort, and (b) so that I can get
> sparc-linux up and running on real-world machines;
> linux is the best firewalling and dial-in
> communications serving platform, and there are plenty
> of "spare" ipc's around locally.
>
> > case, either downgrade the Debian release number for libc5 linked
> binaries or
> > upload packages to an alternate ftp site. You can upload to
> > lix.polytechnique.fr under /pub/Linux/debian/Incoming if you want.
> > Moreover, don't upload incomplete packages to debian master site.
>
> Alternate ftp site was what I had envisiaged, with
> LARGE red letters saying "it looks like debian, smells
> like debian, dpkg's like debian, but it REALLY ISN'T
> DEBIAN - it's work in progress" :)
>
> > PS: I hope I will release a libc6 package soon. I uploaded a
> preliminary
> > stuff to ftp://lix.polytechnique.fr/pub/Linux/debian/sparc/exp. You
> can try
> > it (if you success in downloading it ;-( ). Remember you have to
> patch gcc
> > specs file to be able to build with libc6. I can send you such
> patch if you
> > want.
>
> If libc6 is at the stage where I can compile and link
> debian source, then yes I'm very interested - bug fixes
> to library code don't frighten me, as it's relatively
> easy to upgrade libc.so.
>
> ... again, I can't begin to thank you enough for the
> absolutely essential work you, the debian-sparc, and
> the sparc-linux community are doing - it has a very
> real impact here, and will mean that decommisioned
> sparcs get a new lease on life as news, dns, mail,
> web, dialup and file servers, and as gateways, routers,
> and internet firewalls.
>
> --
> Simon (sjm@condor.com.au)
>
> and I dreamed your dream for you, and now your dream is real
>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-sparc-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: