[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Namespace for cross-compilation tools?

On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 18:19 +0200, Andreas Thienemann wrote:
> kindling the issue, but I'm building an arm buildchain myself right now.
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2006, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > I can see three choices:
> > 
> > 1) Ignore the enduser confusion and go with Ralf's naming:
> >   i386-rtems4.7-binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
> >
> > 2) Namespace the whole thing:
> >   cross-i386-rtems4.7-binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
> > 
> > 3) Play games with the '-' to avoid the "it's an rpm separator"
> > association:
> >   i386_rtems4.7_binutils-2.16.1-0.20051229.1.fc6.i386.rpm
> > 
> > FWIW, I think #2 has the most precedent.
> What about reshuffling the components a bit?
> binutils-i386-arm-%{version}-%{release}.%{dist}.%{target}.rpm?
Confusing, because

a) in repos, other packages from this toolchain will not be next to each
other, i.e. hardly browsable.

b) How would you want to call other add on package for your toolchain?
libc-i386-arm? libncurses-i386-arm?

c) The fact your toolchain is running on i386's already is part of the
rpm's NVR-$arch.rpm => the i386 is redundant and superfluos.

d) "arm" is an architecture and is not sufficient to describe a
toolchain's target. A toolchain's target consists of more.
In case of "bare metal toolchain" (No OS, no libc), this could be
arm-elf or arm-bare-elf or even arm-coff.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]