On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:45:21AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:29:23PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > > > I think the traditional expectation here is that compilers will do > > > their initial bootstrap using an out-of-archive binary, and that once > > > in the archive, they'll be maintained using a self-build-depends > > > instead. > > > You mean having a circular build-dependency? > > <shrug> It's how self-hosting compilers work. That's how the gcc package > works, too. :)
GCC can be built using any other C compiler, though, so there's no freeness or security issue (Ken Thompson can explain why this is important). In some cases (like Smalltalk) this degenerates into a binary quine rather than providing real source. Do you remember my joke package "goodbye" a while ago? One of ideas in the resulting discussion was to put a quoted ELF object into debian/rules, that compiles itself from a provided source (so the letter of the Policy and DFSG is fulfilled), doing some Ken Thompsonese modifications on the way -- hey, these are allowed in the archive as required by compilers you're talking about. Somehow, this idea met the most revulsion, I wonder why. -- 1KB // Yo momma uses IPv4! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111213193017.ga25...@angband.pl
