Re: get a cross compiler sooner

Quoting Wookey (2014-02-06 14:42:46)
> BTW do we know a way to have more than one git repo in an alioth 
> project It would make a lot more sense to have separate repos for the 
> various packages: cross-binutils, cross-gcc, cross-support rather than 
> the one 'crosstoolchain' which currently continas them all.
>
> But I only see a link for 'create a personal repo', not for 'add a
> project repo'.

Short version: Avoid Alioth web interface as much as possible.

We _do_ have separate repos, FusionForge is just too dumb to show it.
Here is the public list of (sub)projects in the crosstoolchain team: 
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?a=project_list;pf=crosstoolchain

I suggest to reshape the current crosstoolchain/crosstoolchain (which 
anyway only contains cross-binutils (versioned which is also a flaw)) to 
be crosstoolchain/cross-binutils with one level subdirectory snipped.

Since that git is only few days old and only you and I have committed to 
it so far, we should not need warn anyone about such "radical" change.

Shall I do that?  I can leave the old one around, and drop it only 
when you've looked at my work and approved it - how does that sound?

***

For a more detailed response, here's my current attitude towards Alioth:

 1) Request a bare project
 2) Self-approve the project (any DD can do that) at
    https://alioth.debian.org/admin/approve-pending.php
 3) Turn off any features except mailinglist(s)
 4) Enable DD special group, and grant it VCS write access
 5) Make all members admins, and remove any non-admin groups
 6) Add a wiki page, promoting non-alioth URLs for anything but
    the landing page for the project (needed to request membership
    which is needed for non-DDs to get write access to git area)


> Where does one ask alioth-admin questions?

On OFTC.net at #alioth

Be nice to the Alioth admins and they don't bite or ignore you - 
speaking from own experience trying both.  Perhaps being british is a 
benefit there :-)


> +++ Jonas Smedegaard [2014-02-06 12:21 +0100]:
>> Quoting Wookey (2014-02-06 00:21:10)
>>> +++ Wookey [2014-02-04 17:18 +0000]:

>>>> And someone with better make foo than me could make a generic rule 
>>>> for the various arch targets rather than lots of copies (OK for 2, 
>>>> annoying for 9)
>>>
>>> OK. I worked this out. It's quite pleasing now.
>>
>> Just "pleasing"?  You gotta be british or something: It is damn neat!
>
> Right. It actually got neater overall once I had defined a pattern 
> rule as then I could use $* (stem) and a nice stamp-name, whereas 
> before I had to use a truncated stamp name and $(@F) (part after 
> directory slash).

Right: Stem variables is *the* key to well-structured "loops" in make.


> I've started a cross-gcc package too with similar structure which
> currently isn't building due to not looking in right host-arch dir to
> find bits/predefs.h. sigh.

Go, Wookey, go!


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=fvQr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----