Re: sparc autocompile
"Jules" == Jules Bean <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Jules> Would it be possible to have the output from your autocompiles
Jules> on the debian-sparc webpages? I think that would be a useful
Jules> thing (maybe only the BAD lines).
Actually, because of various glitches, the large number of
uncompilable packages after all these months, and the LCS's focus on
standardizing the 2.0.7t interface, I'm starting to doubt the benefits
of using glibc 2.1.
Plus our glibc2.1 debs are incompatible with all the redhat/sparc and
ultrapenguin systems already out there, which is making the ultra port
The other day, as a test, I stepped out of the chrooted glibc21
environment -- which has never worked right anyway -- and tried to
build hamm using the regular ultrapenguin glibc. The result? Over
500 packages built without error, including tricky ones like netstd,
all in 24 hours (it was a rather studly UltraSPARC).
Though its not a complete dist yet (a real libc6.deb is missing, and I
couldn't get the sparc X patch to patch in), it does show that using
glibc 2.0, where possible, is easier.
I'm curious if anyone has comments on this.
--------------------- PGP E4 70 6E 59 80 6A F5 78 63 32 BC FB 7A 08 53 4C
__ _ Debian GNU Johnie Ingram <email@example.com> mm mm
/ /(_)_ __ _ ___ __ "netgod" irc.debian.org mm mm
/ / | | '_ \| | | \ \/ / m m m
/ /__| | | | | |_| |> < Yes, I'm Linus, and I am your God. mm mm
\____/_|_| |_|\__,_/_/\_\ -- Linus, keynote address, Expo 98 GO BLUE