On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 07:40 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 07:30 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > > There are at least 2 review requests for cross compilers which have been > > > stuck in FE-GUIDELINES for over a year (to the point where the submitter > > > closed the reports) supposedly waiting for specific guidelines for > > > cross-compiling, so I wonder what happened to those guidelines. > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/CrossCompilers > > That draft needs some work. IMO, this draft should be deleted. > Ralf added notes to each item that > essentially says "don't need it. don't want it." I essentially say: Cross toolchains are ordinary applications. There should be no need to special case them. In practice, this is not a much of a problem, with one exception: The GNU toolchains use ${prefix}/${target_alias}/. This directory is not covered by the FHS. Changing the GNU toolchains to use something else, is technically hardly possible (More precisely: It would imply a lot of hard work and can easily evolve into a package maintainer's nightmare). I.e. to cater the GNU toolchains practice, only one addition to the guidelines would be required: - %_prefix/${target_alias} is reserved for cross toolchains targetting target "$target_alias - cross-toolchains must consistently use the same target_alias for all of its components. Another wide area would be "recipes to workaround the various bugs in rpm cross-building triggers". I don't think this should be covered by the FPG. May-be an addendum to the FPG, or a wiki owned and written by the "Embedded SIG" would be appropriate. Better: rpm and redhat-rpm-config should be fixed. > I'd tend to agree with him on everything but the package naming (I think > having the "cross-" prefix fits in with our existing naming policies), > but I'm not married to it. If the people packaging cross toolchains are > vehemently against that naming, it would be good to know. I say: Mandating prefixing with "cross-" is non-sense, like mandating prefixing native tools with "native-" would be. Shall people wanting it use it, I won't. Package names should be "unique" and "sufficiently self- explanatory" - For GNU toolchains, I recommend $target_alias-<component>, but that's just my personal preference. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
