On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 14:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > 1. Even though there is a practical standard for cross-compilers, no
> one
> > has yet written it down.
> Which standard do you need?
>
> There is only one point where GNU-cross-toolchains collide with our
> current guidelines:
>
> ${exec_prefix}/<target-alias> is defacto practice in GNU-toolchains
> for
> a long time (decades), but collides with the FHS. Unfortunately,
> changing this would require a non-trivial amount of work.
Okay, so documenting this, as well as the naming standard (for the
toolchain and the packages) is what I was referring to. Or to be blunt:
If I wanted to package a sparc cross-compiler, what would I need to know
to do it properly in Fedora? Our written guidelines right now don't
cover it at all (as far as I know).
And yes, I know we have other cross toolchains, but this is the first
time anyone has wanted to package items in Fedora which are built from
those cross toolchains. I agree with your approach of having nothing in
the main repository other than simple testcases in the toolchain
packages, but I also don't have a problem with permitting these packages
to live in a separated location.
~spot
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
