On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 04:01:01PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:45:37AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:57:05AM +0200, Pjotr Kourzanov wrote:
> > > Why are hyphens bad? We already have hurd-i386...
> >
> > Which is os-arch. Not quite the
[ Resending as the initial mail on the 22th seems to have been lost or
stuck somewhere. ]
Hi,
I'll reply here to the whole thread. Even if the tone of this mail was not
encouraging to do so.
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 11:03:35 +0200, Martin Guy wrote:
> > Lennert at least didn't see any problem in
> earmel and earmeb?
would confuse scripts that say
case "$ARCH" in
arm*) stuff ;;
mips*) other_stuff ;;
esac
I mean, they could be modified, yes, but arm* is less trouble.
M
> >>Lennert at least didn't see any problem in making armeb EABI in the future
> >Either we are prevented from making a bigendian ARM EABI repository,
> >or we have to throw away the existing armeb repository, which I gather
> >people are using for real work.
It turns out that Lennert is the lead
* Bill Gatliff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060421 16:32]:
> Does anyone have any expectation that sarge-built applications will run
> without recompilation on etch?
Yes. Speaking that also with my release manager hat on.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:32:04AM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> I'd rather that than have to remember that "armeb" is EABI, while "arm"
> isn't; "armel" is, but ...
>
> Does anyone have any expectation that sarge-built applications will run
> without recompilation on etch?
I certainly expect th
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:32:04AM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:
What you're suggesting will break any remote possiblity of a sane
upgrade.
Oh, alright. Nevermind. :)
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subj
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:32:04AM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> Bill Gatliff wrote:
> >David:
> >
> >David Weinehall wrote:
> >
> >>Changing the name for the existing ARM arch in Debian is *NOT* an
> >>option. It's been stated several times already.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I'm not suggesting that we cha
Bill Gatliff wrote:
David:
David Weinehall wrote:
Changing the name for the existing ARM arch in Debian is *NOT* an
option. It's been stated several times already.
I'm not suggesting that we change the name of anything. I'm only
suggesting that ARM etch become binary-incompatible with
David:
David Weinehall wrote:
Changing the name for the existing ARM arch in Debian is *NOT* an
option. It's been stated several times already.
I'm not suggesting that we change the name of anything. I'm only
suggesting that ARM etch become binary-incompatible with sarge. Which I
don'
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:07:24AM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> Guys:
>
>
> >>earm and earmeb? :)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >earmel and earmeb?
> >
> >
>
> armeleabi armebeabi?
>
> What's icky is that moving forward, EABI is going to be the norm. Sure
> would be nice to have an arch name that's as
Guys:
earm and earmeb? :)
earmel and earmeb?
armeleabi armebeabi?
What's icky is that moving forward, EABI is going to be the norm. Sure
would be nice to have an arch name that's as easy and consistent to
remember as armel/armeb. :(
Maybe with etch, ALL the ARM systems could
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:45:37AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:57:05AM +0200, Pjotr Kourzanov wrote:
> > Why are hyphens bad? We already have hurd-i386...
>
> Which is os-arch. Not quite the same thing. I guess implicitly
> everything else has a linux- in front.
>
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:57:05AM +0200, Pjotr Kourzanov wrote:
> Why are hyphens bad? We already have hurd-i386...
Which is os-arch. Not quite the same thing. I guess implicitly
everything else has a linux- in front.
> also because mipsel already exists and is:
>
> 1. not EABI
> 2. different
Martin Guy wrote:
Lennert at least didn't see any problem in making armeb EABI in the future
Except that people are already using the armeb repository for real
work. If you EABIfy armeb we end up with two sets of Debian packages
floating around called "armeb" that are binary incompatible,
> Lennert at least didn't see any problem in making armeb EABI in the future
Except that people are already using the armeb repository for real
work. If you EABIfy armeb we end up with two sets of Debian packages
floating around called "armeb" that are binary incompatible, the
avoidance of which w
Hi,
A few of us are at the Debian Embedded sessions in Extremadura. We
have talked about the new arch name and have reached consensus on
armel, which matches the "naming convention" used in other arch names
in Debian like mipsel, and with the counterpart armeb. One of the
main concerns was the mis
17 matches
Mail list logo
