On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 01:11:47AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: > On 15.09.2012 01:03, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:15:51AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: > >> > >> So we have the following options: > >> > >> 1) package just this single file, of 20 bytes long, in a > >> separate Arch:all package, in it's own separate source. > >> > >> 2) drop ppc support where this file is required. > > > > 3) Just ship the .bin part together with the rest. > > > > I don't see a problem with it not complying with the DFSG, the > > source is available and it's possible to build with with something > > else in main, just not on all arches. > > Well, in that case we can ship alot more .bin files from qemu > sources too, and build these on corresponding architecturs like > already mentioned (to verify the result is still the same). > Additional x86 ROMs, sparc ROMs, this PPC ROM, ... > > The only problem is to get some real agreement on this. > > > As far as I know, we don't have a requirement that everything > > needs to be build from source, just that we can do it. > > Yes, this same qemu uses a few Arch:all packages (like seabios > and vgabios, openbios and a few more) which can be built on > just one architecture (seabios on x86, openbios on sparc, etc), > and from this point of view, _whole_ qemu (together with all > dependencies) can't be built on any one architecture already. > > But I'm still a bit, well, uncomfortable to ship the blobs, > even if the source is available and it is verified on buildds > during package build on corresponding architectures. > > Allowing such packaging may act as a bad example in the future.
I do agree it's best to try and build everything from source. But I don't see the value for an assembler file. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120914213710.ga17...@roeckx.be
