[aur-general] Cross-compiler that installs in non-standard directories
Hi all. I've never seen an official cross-compiler package in arch, so I'm not sure if I'm breaking some rule here. I'm going to release to [community] in a short time a set of packages (binutils-avr, gcc-avr and avr-libc) which previously installed in /opt/avr. According to the guidelines I moved everything to /usr, but a couple non-standard directories are created. One is /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu, which should be fine, the other is /usr/avr, which contains its own lib and include directories. Obviously namcap complains, but this directory structure solves some conflicts: for example /usr/avr/include/ctype.h would overwrite /usr/include/ctype.h... Should I go for it? C.
bardo wrote:
Hi all.
I've never seen an official cross-compiler package in arch, so I'm not sure if I'm breaking some rule here. I'm going to release to [community] in a short time a set of packages (binutils-avr, gcc-avr and avr-libc) which previously installed in /opt/avr. According to the guidelines I moved everything to /usr, but a couple non-standard directories are created. One is /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu, which should be fine, the other is /usr/avr, which contains its own lib and include directories. Obviously namcap complains, but this directory structure solves some conflicts: for example /usr/avr/include/ctype.h would overwrite /usr/include/ctype.h...
Should I go for it?
C.
The mingw cross compiler (in community) seems to install everything into /usr/i486-mingw32 but I haven't check thoroughly. Why is there a /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu directory and not just a /usr/avr given everything used to install to /opt/avr? One rouge directory would be better than two and getting rid of i686-pc-linux-gnu directory would be a bonus because that name has nothing to do with avr. Allan
Hi all.
I've never seen an official cross-compiler package in arch, so I'm not sure if I'm breaking some rule here. I'm going to release to [community] in a short time a set of packages (binutils-avr, gcc-avr and avr-libc) which previously installed in /opt/avr. According to the guidelines I moved everything to /usr, but a couple non-standard directories are created. One is /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu, which should be fine, the other is /usr/avr, which contains its own lib and include directories. Obviously namcap complains, but this directory structure solves some conflicts: for example /usr/avr/include/ctype.h would overwrite /usr/include/ctype.h...
Should I go for it?
C.
Is it possible to configure this so it installs stuff to /usr/share/avr instead ? <- That would seem to be a standard location for the /usr heirarchy. -Bob Finch Liviu Librescu - În veci pomenirea lui. (May his memory be eternal.)
2008/1/25, w9ya@qrparci.net <w9ya@qrparci.net>:
Is it possible to configure this so it installs stuff to /usr/share/avr instead ? <- That would seem to be a standard location for the /usr heirarchy.
Yesterday I've been trying for a while, but the configuration starts to become complex. My understanding is that when you build a cross-compiler it gets installed by default in $PREFIX/$HOST, hence the 'i686-pc-linux-gnu' directory which, as subdirectories, contains all the supported architectures. If this is right, then I should just fix avr-libc, which installs in /usr/avr instead or /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu (or whatever dir we decide it to be). I could move i686-pc-linux-gnu to /usr/share using --datadir, but I don't think it's right. The FHS states that /usr/share should contain architecture *independent* data, and that most likely isn't. Furthermore, everytime I fiddle with --whateverdir options in configure I introduce some kind of conflict with the existing files. I'm starting to think that all this directory mess was done for a reason =) C.
On Jan 25, 2008 8:28 AM, bardo <ilbardo@gmail.com> wrote:
According to the guidelines I moved everything to /usr, but a couple non-standard directories are created. I think in that case it would be better to keep the pkg in /opt
On Fri 2008-01-25 14:28 , bardo wrote:
Hi all.
I've never seen an official cross-compiler package in arch, so I'm not sure if I'm breaking some rule here. I'm going to release to [community] in a short time a set of packages (binutils-avr, gcc-avr and avr-libc) which previously installed in /opt/avr. According to the guidelines I moved everything to /usr, but a couple non-standard directories are created. One is /usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu, which should be fine, the other is /usr/avr, which contains its own lib and include directories. Obviously namcap complains, but this directory structure solves some conflicts: for example /usr/avr/include/ctype.h would overwrite /usr/include/ctype.h...
Should I go for it?
I suggest you to look at what other distros do (and you can steal their patch, if you need to :) http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/avr-libc/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/gcc-avr/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/binutils-avr/filelist Debian is usually strictly FHS compliant. HTH, -- Alessio Bolognino Please send personal email to themolok@gmail.com Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11 Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF 2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB
2008/1/26, Alessio Bolognino <themolok.ml@gmail.com>:
I suggest you to look at what other distros do (and you can steal their patch, if you need to :)
Great idea, thanks.
http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/avr-libc/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/gcc-avr/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/binutils-avr/filelist
In the end, it seems I should let these scripts do their work, as debian likes it this way =) Any objection? C.
2008/1/26, bardo <ilbardo@gmail.com>:
http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/avr-libc/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/gcc-avr/filelist http://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/binutils-avr/filelist
In the end, it seems I should let these scripts do their work, as debian likes it this way =) Any objection?
Since nobody objected, now binutils-avr, gcc-avr and avr-libc are in [community]. Go me! I want to remember again to contributors of avr-related packages (if any) that I moved everything from /opt/avr to /usr, so please modify your builds accordingly. Corrado
bardo wrote:
I want to remember again to contributors of avr-related packages (if any) that I moved everything from /opt/avr to /usr, so please modify your builds accordingly.
But avrdude still installs in /opt/avr. I guess you missed the --prefix=/opt/avr in the PKGBUILD. Hans
2008/1/30, Hans <hans@janserv.com>:
But avrdude still installs in /opt/avr. I guess you missed the --prefix=/opt/avr in the PKGBUILD.
Sorry, I don't know how I missed that in the final rebuild. Thanks for pointing it out, the new version is uploading now. Corrado
participants (6)
-
Alessio Bolognino
-
Allan McRae
-
bardo
-
Hans
-
Loui
-
w9ya＠qrparci.net