Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-18 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: > Using the same source is a must. Absolutely. > - A policy compliant solution would be a binary source package for > each package which needs to be cross compiled. Same as > kernel-source. Then a package -toolchain could depend > on those packag

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Schleef wrote: > > > Given how easy it is to build a debian package, I don't see much > > need for the maintainer to build N cross-compiling packages -- it > > also means that you're only likely to build the popular cross > > b

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-18 Thread Meelis Roos
> I think he was talking about building cross-compilers on the m68k platform, > not > about cross-compilers to generate m68k binaries. Yes, I understood the same. I do use binutils-m68k on i686 and find it convenient but I also agree that building cross-binutils for all archs on all archs (even t

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-18 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Meelis Roos wrote: > CCC> If there are any objections, please feel free to email me. I don't plan > CCC> on keeping them buried forever...only until a better way is found to > CCC> generate them in a policy-compliant manner and also in manner that > CCC> won't impact slower/ol

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-17 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Jeff Bailey wrote: > Excellent! The long binutils compiles were triggering a bug in the Hurd, > causing a crash, so I had to remove it from the autobuilder. I will > add it back in now. Thanks for letting me know this. All the more reason to get cross-compiling situated a

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-17 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Schleef wrote: > Do you mean that you are removing the patches, or disabling them? > I rather like the gcc-2.95 method of being native-only by default, > but you can edit a few things and build cross-compilers yourself. For now, I'm removing the patches. I am keeping

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-17 Thread Jeff Bailey
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:04:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as > of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling > these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes > se

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-17 Thread David Schleef
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:04:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as > of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling > these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes >

Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-17 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
Just wanted to announce this... I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes several hours to build binutils and all of the cro