Re: Bug#154179: Please create binary-sh and remove binary-sh
Resend to debian-superh list only...
>>>>> In <[🔎] email@example.com>
>>>>> YAEGASHI Takeshi <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Package: ftp.debian.org
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Please consider creating deb repository in ftp.debian.org for some of
>> SuperH architectures: sh3, sh4, sh3eb, sh4eb. And please remove
>> binary-sh which had been obsolete long before.
>> dpkg has already had supports for all these variants since 1.10, but I
>> don't think all of them need to be distributed by the Debian project.
Most of all packages in binary-sh ware built by me. And these packages
are already removed from official tree, I know.
Dpkg was already changed to handle binary-sh3/-sh4/-sh3eb/-sh4eb
(after dpkg 1.10) and dropped handling binary-sh.
So, binary-sh tree is unnecessary.
>> Platforms with sh3eb or sh4eb are not so popular as ones with sh3 or
>> sh4. The binary distribution for the latter both are heavily in demand,
>> especially in the embedded scene. So I suggest creating binary-sh3 and
>> binary-sh4 for now.
Binary incompatibility between SH3 and SH4 was disccused on debian-sh
list, we need both binary-sh3 and binary-sh4, I understand.
On this thread:
I wish to merge binary-sh3 and binary-sh4 support to next Debian
>> I'm not yet an official Debian developer (NM process in progress), but
>> my buildd processes for sh3 and sh4 have successfully built 837 and 3365
>> debs respectively so far. Please visit http://debian.dodes.org/.
>> Most of them are ready to be uploaded to ftp.debian.org and become
>> official Debian packages. Is it possbile to ask someone to sponsor the
Of cause, I'll do this ;-)
And I'm restarting binary-sh3/-sh4 build on my own machine.
<email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com