[Exherbo-dev] Crossing over to cross
compnerd at compnerd.org
Sun Mar 1 19:35:45 UTC 2015
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Benedikt Morbach <
benedikt.morbach at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for picking this up again :)
> We need to handle dependencies properly to not regress on multibuild.
I think you missed one of the core points of all this work. This is
intended to remove multi build for the C class. The use of multi build
will persist, but for python, ruby, (perl?) ABIs, not the C class.
> I don't want to resolve the dependencies for e.g. wine manually to
> compile wine32 and I assume no-one else wants to do that either. So we
> need paludis to resolve dependencies within the target arch and cross
> compile things as needed. We also need additional syntax, at least for
> build-time dependencies, as those can be needed for either one of the
Does something like `cave resolve -m cross -E i686 wine' not work for
that? Yes, we would need to enhance the current label handling to
understand cross. However, given that the previous should allow you to
build a cross-compiled wine (as an example), I think that we can live with
this for the short term.
> In my opinion, this is critical before we can think about merging cross.
I think that we can have a slightly lower bar for the merge. My intention
here is two fold. One, it reduces the barrier to entry, allowing more
people to contribute towards it. cross has languished a bit as of late,
and I would like to see that change. The second objective is to reduce the
overhead of maintaining cross. There were issues that were introduced into
cross due to merging. Having to maintain paludis and arbor is a fair
amount of work. There is no reason to not also branch all the other
repositories, which only increases the amount of effort required to keep
everything in sync.
> Another, less critical problem are alternatives. If you install e.g.
> mawk on your host-arch and select it as your awk provider, then your
> cross-arch suddenly has no awk anymore.
> To fix that we would need to make eclectic aware of the target, but
> for now we could just mandate that you install the same providers for
> both arches.
Yes, and AFAICT, it is not the only issue with alternatives. I agree that
we can address these once we merge, though, doing it earlier would
obviously be nice.
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool
> <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote:
> > Hello exherbo-dev,
> > I think that its about time that we consider crossing over to cross. For
> > most people, this is a one-time hassle of migrating the system layout.
> > file system layout change is the piece that will enable supporting cross.
> > However, it brings us a much nicer multi-arch configuration, and a much
> > nicer mechanism for supporting multiple ABIs (which multi build
> > set out to solve). See  for additional details on the layout and
> > reasoning.
> > Once the layout changes are done, we can make further incremental
> > improvements to cross to make it easier and nicer to use. We have
> > previously taken a similar approach with multibuild, and it worked out
> > and I would like to do something similar here.
> > In preparation for this migration, I would like to gather the set of
> > that we must do before we actually engage in merging the necessary
> > gcc:4.9 was fixed up on cross recently, and should be usable for at least
> > the common case of a single host system. One known limitation is the
> > debug (which I think can be addressed before the merge). AFAICT, system
> > should more or less work (though, due to the migration case, requires
> > acrobatics with options to break circular dependencies).
> > The conversion is slightly painful, but certainly possible. It involves
> > acrobatics similar to bootstrapping exherbo on another linux
> > Starting from a stage would be the simpler approach. We can still
> > both options and let the brave hearted try the more difficult option.
> >  http://exherbo.org/docs/multiarch.txt
> > --
> > Saleem Abdulrasool
> > compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Exherbo-dev mailing list
> > Exherbo-dev at lists.exherbo.org
> > http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Exherbo-dev