Don't drink and derive... anyway, a few comments on this thread. On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:53:52AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Ben Collins wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: > > > Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need* > > > to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine those new g4s are a bit > > > faster... :) We don't _need_ to compile it on m68k, since it does not even work yet. But I still have some hope that one or more of the zillions of m68k users step forward to pick up the pieces and make X work (btw no reply yet from the X guy, Michael). We don't do cross compiling for packages, might speed up things though for these test builds. But I don't think my P2-400 would be so much faster than my [EMAIL PROTECTED] that its worth the hassle (I once tried to set up cross compiling, but I did not come very far and I think gcc-cross and co are little bit outdated). However, if somebody of you has an Athlon-1500 to spare, go ahead. > Looked at UAE yet? Don't know if that emulates an 68040... AFAIR UAE only emulates up to 68020 and no MMU. That will not boot linux-m68k (I tried once). You can boot uclinux however (Geert had success with this) but that does not help building X for m68k. Generally compiling time is no problem, even the buildd has built X4.0 twice already. The problems are only the chaning MANIFEST (Branden said that will go away soon) and the non-working of X4.0 on m68k. So actually, only the last point is a problem. I will look into that again, when I can finish the -12 build. Christian -- http://people.debian.org/~cts/
