Bug#695545: where went crosstool-ng 1.17, startpoint for further effort
Hi Geert,
On 21/05/17 22:21, Geert Stappers wrote:
>
> Hi all who care about crosstool-ng,
>
>
> There are two ITP, Intend To Package, reports for crosstool-ng
> * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695545
> * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=721430
>
> And there is a closed RFS, Request For Sponsoring, report
> on crosstool-ng.
> * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695586#5
>
> So there was packaging done.
> It was on version 1.17. Current version is 1.23
>
> Where did the result go?
>
> Or more important:
> What could be a start point for further effort
> on getting crosstool-ng in Debian?
That's kind of where I'm stuck. I last updated the packaging against
1.22. Ran though lintian and made some updates.
https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng/pull/352
The crosstool-ng maintainer and I had some questions about what
dependencies need spelling out explicitly.
I also wanted to know how seriously to treat some lintian warnings. In
particular because much of ct-ng is shell scripts lintian thinks it
should be a noarch package but it also uses kconfig which must be
compiled for a specific architecture.
What I really wanted was some feedback as to where to go next.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-wnpp/2016/02/msg00895.html
I think I need to at least update my PR against the latest released
version (although technically the packaging can live outside of
crosstool-ng proper).
Reply to: