Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 12:15:29PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>> [I'm only Cc-ing 265597 to tell people to stop Cc-ing the wrong bug now :-P]
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 07:25:19AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >> Linux,parisc* ) ARCH=LINUXHPPA ;;
>> >> Linux,arm* ) ARCH=LINUXARM ;;
>> >> Linux,x86_64* ) ARCH=LINUXAMD64 ;;
>> >> Linux,* ) ARCH=LINUX`uname -m | tr [a-z] [A-Z]` ;;
>> >> [...]
>> > The tests for amd64 is wrong. You are testing for the presence of an
>> > amd64 cpu which doesn't mean that a 64bit amd64 linux is running. You
>> > MUST override $ht from the rules file with the DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU or
>> > you get FTBFS errors on i386 on amd64 cpus.
>>
>> What do you mean by "$ht"? I might be stupid now, but I really can't find any
>> such variable in debian/rules.
>
> Not debian/rules, but pvmgetarch.
>
> I.e. in your package.
I mentioned debian/rules. The usual way for this kind of thing is to
read in the right information from dpkg-architecture in debian/rules
and then to pass that information along via "configure --host=....".
Since I don't know pvm I can't say how that applies there but I feel
its best to keep the debian specifics in debian/rules and not patch
the pvmgetarch to use dpkg-architecture instead of uname.
But its your choice how you do it.
>> Anyhow, this is Not A Bug(TM) for sarge.
>>
>> > bash$ touch m R; uname -m | tr [a-z] [A-Z]
>> > R68k
>> >
>> > Please add ''
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> I'll fix that right away for sarge.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Dirk
>
> --
> Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
> -- Groucho Marx
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
