Am 27.10.2013 16:06, schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> Johannes Schauer wrote:
>> Indeed, none of the Type 1 Self-Cycles are needed to bootstrap the core of
>> Debian. Unfortunately though, most of the Type 2 Self-Cycles are. You will
> find
>> many surprising (at least to me) examples in the section of "Type 2
>> Self-Cycles" under the above link.
>
> On the other hand, if you count Build-Depends-Indep and Architecture: all
> packages as part of what you want to bootstrap, then gnat-4.6 does get pulled
> in...
>
> gzip Build-Depends-Indep: mingw-w64
> mingw-w64 Build-Depends: gcc-mingw-w64-{i686,x86_64}
> gcc-mingw-w64 Build-Depends: gnat-4.6
>
> (And also, you have the issue that gcc-4.8 Build-Depends on libantlr-java and
> libecj-java, whose builds require either gcj-4.8 from the same source
> package,
> or openjdk-7-jdk which also Build-Depends on ecj.)
>
> I realize that these sorts of issues aren't as important for the practical
> problem of bootstrapping a new port; but ideally, from a philosophical point
> of view we should be able to bootstrap all our packages. (To be honest, the
> Java packages are such a tangled mess that I've given up on trying to
> bootstrap that part of the archive for now -- and many of those do get pulled
> into the minimal set of ca. 1473 source packages I get with my criteria.)
well, please can we concentrate on practical issues first, then come back to the
philosopicals again? With recent binary-indep packages you just cross-build
gcc-4.8 including java. Problem solved. I never did see a bug report about the
"tangled mess" in the java packages, so I'll just ignore that. gcj and openjdk
were one of the easier parts for the AArch64 bootstrap.
Matthias
--
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/526d497d....@debian.org
