Hi
(We also had separate discussions Hector, Matthias and I, sometimes
including debian-embedded@ and/or Neil Williams -- I'm catching up on
the debian-devel@ thread.)
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009, Hector Oron wrote:
> I would like to do a little explanation on the ITP I have filled for
> {linux,binutils,eglibc,gcc-4.3,gcc-4.4,gdb}-armel.
Another approach which Matthias suggested (IIRC) is to use a single
source package build-depending on all -source packages to build the
cross-toolchain with a single upload. With the split sources approach,
you need something like 7 uploads to bootstrap the toolchain (I'm not
counting gdb), and a close number if any of linux, binutils, eglibc or
gcc change. A single source package would be very heavy to build, but
would be more effective.
I worked on a linux/binutils/eglibc/gcc as separate source packages
implementation recently, based on the Ubuntu toolchain (basically
identical to Debian's for this discussion). The resulting tree is at:
bzr co lp:~lool/+junk/cross-toolchain
and some binary packages for armel are available in my PPA, albeit
these still suffer from a couple of important issues.
> In order to avoid code duplication in the archive, this packages
> build depend on -source packages.
I don't actually like the amount of logic/duplication with the
toolchain source I ended up with; instead, it would make more sense to
extend the rules in the real packages (gcc, eglibc, binutils etc.) to
be able to produce first stage, second stage etc. cross-compilers and
call them from a new cross-toolchain package. I would also like to
propose to change the -source packages to ship original .dsc, .diff.gz
etc. instead of a patched or unpatched tarball with or without patches
and/or rules to apply the patches.
> As major technical issues, I would try to build cross compilers
> with --sysroot support, but that means dpkg-cross need to be updated
> for sysroot paths. For now, we might take the road we have been doing
> at emdebian.org (for many years) and start changing bits towards a
> nice sysrooted solution.
As we already discussed in private email, I find sysroot an interesting
path forward, especially knowing that --with-headers/--with-libs is
deprecated upstream, but I believe it's an orthogonal change which
should be implemented in the toolchain as time permits. I would also
prefer relocatable toolchains, but using the cross-compiler locations
is fine for now.
I'd love to help on this cross-toolchain project for Debian and
Ubuntu's uses and will look at discussing it with Matthias and other
interested parties at UDS next week.
Thanks,
--
Loïc Minier
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
