On Sat, November 28, 2009 7:12 pm, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote: > 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.
So binutils-2.19.51 should be built with which compiler? Any patches needed? > 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. So we need to build eglibc with gcc 4.2 or 4.4? Any patches against debian sid? > 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). Should this be after we get eglibc-2.10 functional? All we have right now is glibc-2.5, right? Thanks, Stephen -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <step...@marenka.net> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
