On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:08:26PM +0000, Wookey wrote: > Following on from discussion in this thread > http://lists.debian.org/debian-embedded/2012/06/msg00030.html > > The cross-build-essential package has been developed some more and > tested in Quantal for arm64 bootstrap, and armel and armhf builds. It > works nicely. We definitely want to start using this. > > The latest code is available at: > http://people.debian.org/~wookey/bootstrap/ubunturepo/pool/main/c/cross-build-essential/
I think it would be a good idea to put this in build-essential, but I have one concern. At the moment this uses "Depends: libc6-dev:armhf" (etc.). The multiarch spec currently explicitly says that Depends on PKG:ARCH for a particular architecture (as opposed to PKG:any) is undefined. I'm therefore a bit worried that adding such syntax to build-essential would cause some bit of archive machinery to explode; it certainly results in a Lintian error. That said, it apparently works in simple sbuild chroot situations. CCing -embedded and -dpkg for advice. The other possibility is to add bridging dependencies by way of artificial package names that only exist on one architecture, e.g.: Package: libc6-armhf-cross Architecture: any Depends: libc6-armhf Package: libc6-armhf Architecture: armhf Multi-Arch: foreign Depends: libc6 Package: libc6 Architecture: any Multi-Arch: same That's not without its own problems, though; it bloats Packages and (last I checked) it requires manually forcing britney to accept it into testing. If it's possible to use the :ARCH syntax instead, that would be better. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130108152349.ga2...@riva.dynamic.greenend.org.uk
