new devel packages
Hello, following a request about Debian/SPARC not providing a powerful environment for developers, I uploaded some packages to master: make 3.75-4 m41.4-6 byacc 1.9-11.4 bison 1.25-9 sp1.1.1-3 I uploaded too: lynx 2.7.1-1 (some packages need it to build doc) man-db2.3.10-38 (old man package I've built on my system had never reached debian dist) slang0.99.34 0.99.38 (requested by lynx) slang0.99.34-dev 0.99.38 All of them are linked with libc5. make is an older release than the one in hamm because the latest (3.75-6) is for libc6. Feel free to port & upload other packages not already based on libc6. Every work is welcome. Bye. PS: I will upload libc6 as soon as I receive a patch to fix a serious bug in libc initialization for static binaries that prevents them to run. -- Eric Delaunay | "La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant." Henri Jeanson (1900-1970) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Where's make?
simon mackinlay wrote: > > So which other packages are needed as base for Debian development? > > > I can help to package some tools: my system is hybrid from > > Debian/RedHat so I > > > can run most of the tools needed to create Debian packages. > > > > If anyone has built the "sp" package (provides nsgmls > > used by dpkg to format the dpkg manuals) and have it > > lying around, I'd appreciate it... Ok, I will try to build it. However, dpkg is already available for sparc on any Debian mirror (it's a 1.4.0.7 release) and you can use the most recent dpkg-dev because it is archtecture independant. Moreover, you only have to build package for sparc architecure, so you don't have to generate dpkg documentation. Regards. -- Eric Delaunay | "La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant." Henri Jeanson (1900-1970) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
RE: Where's make?
> So which other packages are needed as base for Debian development? > > I can help to package some tools: my system is hybrid from > Debian/RedHat so I > > can run most of the tools needed to create Debian packages. > > If anyone has built the "sp" package (provides nsgmls > used by dpkg to format the dpkg manuals) and have it > lying around, I'd appreciate it... > > I'm currently fighting my way through apache > patched with microsoft frontpage extensions; this > has meant doing a quick hatchet job on msql and dld > > Cheerio... > > -- > Simon([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > and I dreamed your dream for you, and now your dream is real > -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Where's make?
Steve Byrne wrote: > simon mackinlay writes: > > > > > > Given that it's almost impossible to do any work > > > on debian-sparc without these packages, perhaps we > > > need a centralised site and mirrors for these packages, > > > and also to update pointers on the debian-sparc web > > > site to indicate the location of such? > > Hear, hear. This *enables* more people to help with porting and packaging. > This is a good thing. Even if it's not the "one true way", if it's good > enough > for now, then it's worth doing. It also relieves some of the pressure to get > libc6 ready and repackage everything with that. Ok, so you can upload each package that still use libc5 to Debian master's site. No problem. Actually, for packages that are linked with libc6 in other ports, I guess you can upload an older revision. This is what I've just done for make: 3.75-6 is for libc6 but I just uploaded a 3.75-4 I took from bo. So which other packages are needed as base for Debian development? I can help to package some tools: my system is hybrid from Debian/RedHat so I can run most of the tools needed to create Debian packages. So post a list here, please. Regards. -- Eric Delaunay | "La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant." Henri Jeanson (1900-1970) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Where's make?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: : > > Alternate ftp site was what I had envisiaged, with : > > LARGE red letters saying "it looks like debian, smells : > > like debian, dpkg's like debian, but it REALLY ISN'T : > > DEBIAN - it's work in progress" :) That's a very good working definition of the "unstable" tree on master.debian.org. I see no reason to not use it, *now*, for work in progress on debian-sparc. Bdale -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
RE: Where's make?
simon mackinlay writes: > > > > Given that it's almost impossible to do any work > > on debian-sparc without these packages, perhaps we > > need a centralised site and mirrors for these packages, > > and also to update pointers on the debian-sparc web > > site to indicate the location of such? Hear, hear. This *enables* more people to help with porting and packaging. This is a good thing. Even if it's not the "one true way", if it's good enough for now, then it's worth doing. It also relieves some of the pressure to get libc6 ready and repackage everything with that. > > > > Alternate ftp site was what I had envisiaged, with > > LARGE red letters saying "it looks like debian, smells > > like debian, dpkg's like debian, but it REALLY ISN'T > > DEBIAN - it's work in progress" :) Right: "The files at site will enable you to build and run Debian/SPARC, but it does not represent the state of the art". > > > > ... again, I can't begin to thank you enough for the > > absolutely essential work you, the debian-sparc, and > > the sparc-linux community are doing - it has a very > > real impact here, and will mean that decommisioned > > sparcs get a new lease on life as news, dns, mail, > > web, dialup and file servers, and as gateways, routers, > > and internet firewalls. I second this. I'm glad I'm not in SunSoft, where publically supporting something other than Solaris might not be viewed too favorably. Steve -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
RE: Where's make?
> However, libc5.4 is not available for SPARC. There is only a libc5.3.12. > > Davide Barbieri tried to merge patches for libc5.4 into this 5.3.12 > with no > > success. Maybe you have more skills to do it. > > But I think it's better to deal with 5.3.12 for old stuff and work > on glibc-2 > > now. I'm working on a glibc package but I have some pbs to build > it. > > *nod*, I did have a brief crack at it, but it's > also beyond my skills - libc6 looks inherently > more portable, and I also would prefer effort to > be spent on re-integrating sparc patches to libc > into the main source tree. > > > Some of this stuff is already ported: dpkg*, libdb1, libgdbm, flex. > > They are available in Debian under hamm/hamm/binary-sparc/... > > I've also made available other packages at lix.polytechnique.fr > under > > /pub/Linux/debian/sparc/bo/experimental-sparc (make, m4, ppp, > sendmail, > > deliver, file, kermit) but I don't remember why I didn't move them > to hamm. > > Surely because some files are missing like documentation, ... > > Given that it's almost impossible to do any work > on debian-sparc without these packages, perhaps we > need a centralised site and mirrors for these packages, > and also to update pointers on the debian-sparc web > site to indicate the location of such? > > > Now, I'd rather want not to upload any package you have linked with > libc5 but > > were already moved to libc6 in other ports. We have to keep package > numbers > > in sync with other architectures and we can't provide 2 packages > (one linked > > with libc5 and the other w/ libc6) with the same release number. In > this > > *nod*, I can see the problem - but by the same token, > I'd like to put together private use development and > production sets, so that (a) other developers can > contribute to the effort, and (b) so that I can get > sparc-linux up and running on real-world machines; > linux is the best firewalling and dial-in > communications serving platform, and there are plenty > of "spare" ipc's around locally. > > > case, either downgrade the Debian release number for libc5 linked > binaries or > > upload packages to an alternate ftp site. You can upload to > > lix.polytechnique.fr under /pub/Linux/debian/Incoming if you want. > > Moreover, don't upload incomplete packages to debian master site. > > Alternate ftp site was what I had envisiaged, with > LARGE red letters saying "it looks like debian, smells > like debian, dpkg's like debian, but it REALLY ISN'T > DEBIAN - it's work in progress" :) > > > PS: I hope I will release a libc6 package soon. I uploaded a > preliminary > > stuff to ftp://lix.polytechnique.fr/pub/Linux/debian/sparc/exp. You > can try > > it (if you success in downloading it ;-( ). Remember you have to > patch gcc > > specs file to be able to build with libc6. I can send you such > patch if you > > want. > > If libc6 is at the stage where I can compile and link > debian source, then yes I'm very interested - bug fixes > to library code don't frighten me, as it's relatively > easy to upgrade libc.so. > > ... again, I can't begin to thank you enough for the > absolutely essential work you, the debian-sparc, and > the sparc-linux community are doing - it has a very > real impact here, and will mean that decommisioned > sparcs get a new lease on life as news, dns, mail, > web, dialup and file servers, and as gateways, routers, > and internet firewalls. > > -- > Simon([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > and I dreamed your dream for you, and now your dream is real > -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
