On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:13:13AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I guess I'll have to see about coding support for .note.ABI-tag sometime.
> Think they'd accept a patch for that?
Probably the best person to contact directly about this is David O'Brien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> who is the toolchai
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 06:34:14AM +, Tony Finch wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> >
> >I need to look into it a bit more, and figure out exactly what FreeBSD does
> >and doesn't do with this.
>
> Everything you need to know is in /usr/src/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c:
>
> /
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 08:38:19AM -0600, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:12:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Sure: apt_0.5.4_freebsd-i386.deb vs. apt_0.5.4_i386.deb
> >
>
> Oh that, well. I don't care about the name
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:12:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Having distributions for particular architectures wouldn't be required. All
> you need is stable, testing and sid. Makes dinstall's job easy. For CD sets,
> you pick a kernel, and pull a list of packages that are compatible with i
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:12:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Of course you have to specify this if you want to use a flexible
> > architecture system. But it should not be part of the design of the
> > architecture system (eg nothing should depend on the selection of such
> > interface n
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:07:18AM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:25:51AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 4. Drop keeping metadata in package filenames. Make them just a unique
> >string, assigned when the package is installed into the archive.
> >T
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:47:32PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:25:51AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I think you could say that a binary's environment is made up these things:
>
> Whatever. The exact set of virtual package names that make up the
> architectur
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:07:18AM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
> Which would lead to the problem, that in the pool/ there would be stuff
> like:
>
> pool/main/p/package/:
>
> package_Version-1_abcde.deb
> package_Version-1_lsahd.deb
[...]
> Essentially rendering manual download im
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 05:18:51PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> Maybe there should be several "layers" of Packages files.
I don't think the distributor should try to anticipate the needs of
individual users of the distribution at this level.
If you want to get rid of all emulated packages, just
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:25:51AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think you could say that a binary's environment is made up these things:
Whatever. The exact set of virtual package names that make up the
architecture depends on your needs (I called this the universe).
Of course you have to
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 01:25:51AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 4. Drop keeping metadata in package filenames. Make them just a unique
> string, assigned when the package is installed into the archive.
> That gets rid of the need to add something to the filename to
>
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd be in
> favour of going further: use one Packages file, and determine
> available packages based on the tags your kernel and libc support.
>
> It's a little radical, but I think it could work well.
Ouch. Partial mirro
There's a field in the ELF header called OS/ABI. Readelf -h finds it, and it
looks like this:
Normal binaries:
OS/ABI:UNIX - System V
FreeBSD binaries:
OS/ABI:UNIX - FreeBSD
I need to look into it a bit
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>I need to look into it a bit more, and figure out exactly what FreeBSD does
>and doesn't do with this.
Everything you need to know is in /usr/src/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c:
/* We support three types of branding -- (1) the ELF EI_OSABI field
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 03:37:36AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:28:35PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Like libc.so.4 on FreeBSD, soon to be libc.so.5? Not compatible with libc5
> > on
> > Linux. It's confusing, but I don't know any good way around it.
>
> Well
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:41:07AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 02:35:50PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> >
> >> Also, FreeBSD (and possibly NetBSD as well) uses the ELF OSABI field
> > to mark
> >> it's binaries.
> >
> >The GNU/Hurd does it as well.
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > That should be correct. A distribution already is just a Package file with
> > references to files in the pool. No real change there. The difference would
> > seem to be in the generation of the Packages file.
>
> Yes, exactly. And you need some d
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 02:35:50PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>
>> Also, FreeBSD (and possibly NetBSD as well) uses the ELF OSABI field to
> mark
>> it's binaries.
>
>The GNU/Hurd does it as well.
>
>
> hmm, last i looked hurd used an ELF note, like NetBSD.
Yes, sorry, I th
> Also, FreeBSD (and possibly NetBSD as well) uses the ELF OSABI field to
mark
> it's binaries.
The GNU/Hurd does it as well.
hmm, last i looked hurd used an ELF note, like NetBSD.
Bear in mind that quite a few systems already support multiple kinds of
binaries, and there are more on the way. Sparc, ia64 and x86-64 (not sure
if x86-64 is a Debian arch yet) all can do both 64 and 32 bit binaries. I
think s390 might too, but I'm not sure. The packaging system ne
On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:28:35PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Like libc.so.4 on FreeBSD, soon to be libc.so.5? Not compatible with libc5 on
> Linux. It's confusing, but I don't know any good way around it.
Well, then you have to include the OS-ABI field into the dependency name for
all libr
On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 10:34:36PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (I am not subscribed. You might CC me on interesting threads/sub-threads)
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "The major oversight is that he completely fails to mention libc. And for us,
> that remains a big issue. Right now
Hi,
(I am not subscribed. You might CC me on interesting threads/sub-threads)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The major oversight is that he completely fails to mention libc. And for us,
that remains a big issue. Right now, and for immediately forseeable future,
I'm not going to be using glibc."
The
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> Markus Brinkmanm (of HURD fame) has written this
> http://master.debian.org/~brinkmd/arch-handling.txt
> which is mandatory reading for us.
>
> they (the hurd people) are very interested in working closely
> together with us, simply since we together
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 05:59:28PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> Markus Brinkmanm (of HURD fame) has written this
> http://master.debian.org/~brinkmd/arch-handling.txt
> which is mandatory reading for us.
You're right, that's a very good document. He's apparently been thinking along
similar li
Markus Brinkmanm (of HURD fame) has written this
http://master.debian.org/~brinkmd/arch-handling.txt
which is mandatory reading for us.
they (the hurd people) are very interested in working closely
together with us, simply since we together might have enough
weight to make debian make more archit
26 matches
Mail list logo
