[aur-general] architecture independent packages
For an architecture independent package, is it sufficient to build the package once, rename it appropriately and upload? Or should it be built on both 32 and 64 bit? -- Abhishek.
2008/3/16, Abhishek Dasgupta <abhidg@gmail.com>:
For an architecture independent package, is it sufficient to build the package once, rename it appropriately and upload?
No, because there is arch = i686/x86_64 in .PKGINFO
Or should it be built on both 32 and 64 bit?
No. :-) For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-) -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/3/16, Abhishek Dasgupta <abhidg@gmail.com>:
For an architecture independent package, is it sufficient to build the package once, rename it appropriately and upload?
No, because there is arch = i686/x86_64 in .PKGINFO
Or should it be built on both 32 and 64 bit?
No. :-) For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
-- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Thanks! I noticed a few packages in community which are architecture-independent but the versions are different in 32 and 64 bit; so I could just download the existing package, modify the .PKGINFO and repackage it for 64bit w/o compiling, right? -- Abhishek
2008/3/16, Abhishek Dasgupta <abhidg@gmail.com>:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/3/16, Abhishek Dasgupta <abhidg@gmail.com>:
For an architecture independent package, is it sufficient to build the package once, rename it appropriately and upload?
No, because there is arch = i686/x86_64 in .PKGINFO
Or should it be built on both 32 and 64 bit?
No. :-) For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
-- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Thanks! I noticed a few packages in community which are architecture-independent but the versions are different in 32 and 64 bit; so I could just download the existing package, modify the .PKGINFO and repackage it for 64bit w/o compiling, right?
Seems so, thanks for doing that. ;-) -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
2008/3/16, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
2008/3/16, Abhishek Dasgupta <abhidg@gmail.com>:
For an architecture independent package, is it sufficient to build the package once, rename it appropriately and upload?
No, because there is arch = i686/x86_64 in .PKGINFO
Or should it be built on both 32 and 64 bit?
No. :-) For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
Oops, that doesn't work. You'll have to edit .PKGINFO by hand and then repackage with -Rf and rename the file to have x86_64 suffix (not needed for community though, because AUR backend still doesn't support them). -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
2008/3/18, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
2008/3/16, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
Oops, that doesn't work. You'll have to edit .PKGINFO by hand and then repackage with -Rf and rename the file to have x86_64 suffix (not needed for community though, because AUR backend still doesn't support them).
argh! makepkg still places system's CARCH in new .PKGINFO. I've managed to get it correctly only by changing CARCH in makepkg.conf Anyway that's a hack and I posted this followup just to correct my previous wrong suggestion. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Roman Kyrylych a écrit :
2008/3/18, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
2008/3/16, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
Oops, that doesn't work. You'll have to edit .PKGINFO by hand and then repackage with -Rf and rename the file to have x86_64 suffix (not needed for community though, because AUR backend still doesn't support them).
argh! makepkg still places system's CARCH in new .PKGINFO. I've managed to get it correctly only by changing CARCH in makepkg.conf
Anyway that's a hack and I posted this followup just to correct my previous wrong suggestion.
A much easier solution is to use these scripts http://ankabut.net/archlinux/makepkg64 and http://ankabut.net/archlinux/communitypkg64 ;) They are also a hack of course, pending implementation of the "arch=any" feature. F
2008/3/19, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net>:
Roman Kyrylych a écrit :
2008/3/18, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
2008/3/16, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:
For example, you have i686 system: i686: makepkg (but do not use -c option) x86_64: CARCH=x86_64 makepkg -R ;-)
Oops, that doesn't work. You'll have to edit .PKGINFO by hand and then repackage with -Rf and rename the file to have x86_64 suffix (not needed for community though, because AUR backend still doesn't support them).
argh! makepkg still places system's CARCH in new .PKGINFO. I've managed to get it correctly only by changing CARCH in makepkg.conf
Anyway that's a hack and I posted this followup just to correct my previous wrong suggestion.
A much easier solution is to use these scripts http://ankabut.net/archlinux/makepkg64 and http://ankabut.net/archlinux/communitypkg64 ;)
They are also a hack of course, pending implementation of the "arch=any" feature.
thanks for simplification the hack :) -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
participants (3)
-
Abhishek Dasgupta
-
Firmicus
-
Roman Kyrylych