On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 11:16:19PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> 2) The rules files has been changed quite a bit to properly put files
> into ia32-libs and ia32-libs-dev as they should be. Subsequently
> the ia32-libs-dev package on amd64 was empty and was removed. Also,
> for amd64, the libc6 has been removed as glibc builds libc6-i386
> now.
Yes, I've noticed that biarch packages are now built natively with -m cflag.
> Should it be possible to build linux-i386 binaries on
> kfreebsd-i386?
Not when using the native compiler. Maybe we could have a i*86-*-linux-gnu
cross-compiler.
Also note that we could want native i*86-*-kfreebsd-gnu libraries as well (for
kfreebsd-amd64), so the situation is a bit more complicated.
> If so the kfreebsd should mimim ia64 and still build
> ia32-libs-dev and lib32gcc1-dev. If not then libc6 still needs to
> be included in ia32-libs on kfreebsd-i386.
But then kfreebsd-i386 would be the only arch doing that?
> 3) All use of the host architecture (mostly uname calls) have been
> replaced with equivalent DPKG_BUILD_ARCH checks. This allows to run
> debuild -a{ia64,amd64} on any arch.
ITYM DEB_HOST_ARCH.
> As a result the patch for this bug has to be rewritten, sorry.
No problem. ia32-libs was a dirty hack anyway; i expected this to happen
already.
> If you could write and test a new patch that would greatly speed up
> inclusion of kfreebsd-i386. Otherwise we will try to include this in
> the long run and hope it works untested.
I suggest we put this on hold for now. Let's keep this bug open for future
reference ok?
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
