David Woodhouse wrote:
Do you really think we're going to get them to care about cross builds too? I _did_ care about cross-compilation, and I gave up on it. I really don't think we have much chance of getting package maintainers (and upstreams) to handle it. Unfortunately.
No, I don't think it's realistic that existing package maintainers should have to directly handle cross build failures as well as native build failures. This is largely a volunteer effort and adding more load to volunteers is going to have a negative impact.
I do believe that people who care about cross building could share in the responsibility for packages that fail to build in a cross environment. Fedora is a project in the spirit of cooperation and I'm sure a large number of maintainers wouldn't mind the extra help. For many autotools-based packages, the changes are minimal.
In a perfect (bug free) world, cross support could simply be added to Koji, the switch could be thrown, and all packages would magically build as crosses. Of course, that's not going to happen. It will start with 1 package, then 2.... whatever the final method is, it will start with the desirous, then continue with the willing.
Like suggested in the secondary arches discussion, failed cross builds would not hold up packages that build fine natively (The hypothetical cross-friendly flag could be removed, even). Part of the fun with Fedora is breaking new ground, but we don't want to spoil things for anybody else in the process.
-- Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc@xxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
