Re: consolidate linux-libc-dev headers
On Sun, Dec 24, 2023 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 05:15:18PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > I guess that the list of architectures will always be incomplete for
> > some, so we probably still need a process for building a modified
> > linux-libc-dev package only. This probably requires some build profiles.
> > Is pkg.linux.nokernel pkg.linux.notools pkg.linux.quick a sensible set
> > of profiles for this? Is there an easily patchable way to add an
> > architecture?
>
> Let's see. I have some changes pending that make config changes easier.
>
> Also we might be able to add a linux-libc-dev-arch that builds a
> standalone version again and is only built with a special build profile,
> but it still needs the package to know more information then dpkg does
> provide.
>
> Or you inject a new reboostrap-specific package that just adds a
> symlink /usr/lib/$DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH/asm pointing to the appropriate
> /usr/lib/linux/uapi/$ARCH if linux-libc-dev does not include this.
I think we can also just ship all Linux architectures. We currently do
ship 13 (becoming 14) of the 21 currently supported ones. Then only the
multiarch aliases are missing.
Or, most likely bad idea, we teach the compiler or the libc to look into
/usr/lib/linux/uapi.
Bastian
--
What kind of love is that? Not to be loved; never to have shown love.
-- Commissioner Nancy Hedford, "Metamorphosis",
stardate 3219.8
Reply to: