On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Ingo J?rgensmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:10:49AM -0600, Stephen R. Marenka wrote: > > On Fri, November 27, 2009 3:12 am, Ingo J??rgensmann wrote: > > > On a sidenote it seems that Arrakis and Spice aren't building > > > packages anymore. Are they still needed? > > Sid is broken last I checked. I haven't really seen a great deal of > > interest in getting it fixed. We haven't built anything in some months > > I believe. It's a bummer. > > Hmpf... so, currently it doesn't make much sense to keep the machines > running, until some issues are solved? > There are some packages that I'd like to see built under etch-m68k. From the gcc-4.2 build failures that Stephen showed us, I have my doubts about packages in the testing/unstable suites. I'd like to see some etch-m68k buildds put to work on the NPTL tool chain. I was able to cross-compile the debian sources plus TLS/NPTL patches. There's still a couple of issues. Firstly the ABI is not finalized. But that doesn't mean that the exercise is not useful. In particular, binutils-2.19.51 can be uploaded. The new kernel and kernel headers would then be needed, but cannot be uploaded. Another issue is one of the requirements of eglibc-2.10, which is gcc >= 4.2. One way around that is to patch out that version check for building the glibc headers. Given the headers, it is possible to build gcc-4.4. The third issue that comes to mind is gcc itself. It seems to me that all gcc packages should drop the finline-gnu89 patch that only m68k uses. I think it is there solely for glibc-2.5 (and I don't trust that binary anyway). Finn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
