On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:39:54AM -0600, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > >I would fully agree with the sentiment that cross-compiling the entire > >distro as _the_ standard way of maintaining the arch package repository > >is not a realistic scenario and will likely never be. Preferably, I > >would like to just keep doing this entirely natively. > > I hesitate to say never, prefering to invoke the forseeable future. > Wherever native builds are a viable option, it makes sense to use them. > Wherever cross builds are a viable option, it makes sense to use them. What I said was that I don't think that cross-building packages will ever supersede natively building packages as the preferred package building method. I don't really see this changing any time soon -- even if I'd like to be able to build more packages cross. > >It appears a lot less effort to maintain a set of patches to make some > >limited subset of packages (say, 300 packages) cross-compilable, > >though. In some cases, we'll have to do this anyway. > > Indeed- if you can simply cross build the packages at the top of the > dependency tree (kernel, libc, coreutils, init, bash/sh), you are in > much better shape. ACK. > What's more, they are typically very cross friendly. My experience is somewhat different, but OK. :-) One thing I wondered about, are your (cross-) diffs available somewhere? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
