1 |
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 03:19:14PM +0200, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: |
2 |
> Hello! |
3 |
> |
4 |
|
5 |
Hi peter! |
6 |
|
7 |
> I am working on a clean gentoo-uclibc system, but some of the packages are |
8 |
> too old and need too much patching to work w/ uclibc, so I need ~arch |
9 |
> version. How can I enforce usage of some of the packages that are marked |
10 |
> as ~arch to be used for uclibc overwriting the keyword ~arch w/ arch. |
11 |
> I do not want to use generally ~arch, only for some of the packages, and I |
12 |
> do not want to remark these packages to stable. |
13 |
> These changes should also work for bootstrap and catalyst stage building. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> How are you intending to handle uclibc, should it have a separate profile, |
16 |
> like uclibc-arch-2004.x and hardened-uclibc-arch-2004.x? the embedded |
17 |
> subdir is not ok for it (ex. virtual/glibc sys-libs/glibc) |
18 |
> |
19 |
|
20 |
Heh I've been sorta trying to touch base with you on this stuff for a |
21 |
while. Solar and I have been half heartedly attempting to do this for |
22 |
a while. Most of my efforts have been in vain. |
23 |
|
24 |
My latest effort involved using the uclibc toolchain builder to |
25 |
replace gcc and libgcc with uclibc variants by copying it into a |
26 |
stage1 install and modifying all the symlinks. This worked OK on my |
27 |
powerpc cross compiling for mips-el, but when I attempted to switch to |
28 |
x86libc -> x86uClibc I was unsuccessful. |
29 |
|
30 |
Got any details on what you are doing ? |
31 |
|
32 |
> Should the '-doc' use flag not been honoured generally (not |
33 |
> installing any docs, info pages, man pages)? |
34 |
> |
35 |
|
36 |
like the other guy who responded said. nodoc, noman and what not can |
37 |
be used. |
38 |
|
39 |
hope to hear from you soon, |
40 |
Dave |
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list |