I see. But I do not totally agree. We're used to do SCO development on theLinux box and it works like a charm.
Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 52146 Wuerselen Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44 Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10 >-----Original Message----- >From: Galen Hazelwood [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 12:55 AM >To: Michael Meskes >Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org >Subject: Re: GCC cross-compilation > >Michael Meskes wrote: >> >> Does this mean I could upload all architecture version for my packages? >> If so yes, I think it's useful. >> >> Michael >> > >Well, I personally distrust cross-compilers...at least gcc cross >compilers. I know that at least one crossover (i386->alpha) has been >known to produce broken binaries at one time, and how can you tell when >the next such disaster will be? Since you can't actually test the >cross-compiled programs you generated, you never know when you might be >uploading something _really_ broken into stable. > >Cross compilers are very good for bootstrapping new linux ports and >things like that, but I wouldn't want to upload "production binaries" >built by a cross-compiler, and would be _very_ upset to find that I was >using one. > >--Galen -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
